05a3fe3944764f4a0300000094b92aa3.docx

You
Center-Lod District Court

42209-04-19 State of Israel v. Silver (Supervised Detainee/Prisoner) et al.
12 January 2023
before
The Honorable Judge Liora Brody, Deputy – Avd
The Honorable Judge Michal Barak Nevo
The Honorable Justice Michael Tamir
The accuser
Israel
against
Defendants
1. Amos Dov Silver (detainee) ID 036559680
2. Bar-El Levy (Detainee) I.D. 304864762
3. Ofir Michel ID 039076229
4. Roy Ashkenazi 036418689
5. Ran Buganim, ID 036791416
6. Shimon Tohami 303028484
7. Omri Shmuel Meyerson, 1970 046248977
8. Idan Burla, 1970 207278557
<#2#>
Present:
Counsel for the accuser – Adv. Shiri Rom and Adv. Yoni Hadad
Counsel for Defendant 1 – Adv. Itai Bar Oz and Adv. Nitzan Beilin
Counsel for Defendant No. 2 – Adv. Itai Rozin
Counsel for Defendant 3 – Adv. Itai Bar Oz on behalf of Adv. Kobi Sudri
Counsel for Defendant 4 – Adv. Yaron Barzilai and Adv. Omri Rosenberg
Counsel for Defendant 5 – Adv. Yaron Barzilai on behalf of Adv. Liran Zilberman
Counsel for Defendant 6 – Adv. Itai Rozin on behalf of Adv. Nadav Greenwald
Counsel for Defendant 7 – Missing with Court Permission
Counsel for Defendant 8 – Adv. Itai Bar Oz on behalf of Adv. Einat Ben Moshe
Defendant 1 – Missing with court permission

Defendant 2 – presented himself
Defendant 3 – Missing with Court Permission
Defendant 4 – presented himself
Defendant 5 - No showing up (announced that he would arrive late)
Defendant 6 – Presented
<#2#>
protocol
Hon. H. Brody: Serious Crime Case 42209-04-19. State of Israel v. Amos Silver and
others. Meeting of January 12, 2023. Before the panel sitting on trial. Present:
Counsel for the accuser Advocates Shiri Rom and Yoni Hadad, counsel for Defendant 1
Attorneys Itay Bar Oz and Nitzan Beilin, Counsel for Defendant 2 Attorney Itai
Rozin, Counsel for Defendant 3 Adv. Bar Oz on behalf of Adv. Kobi Sudari, Counsel
for Defendant 4 Counsel for Advocates Yaron Barzilai and Omri Rosenberg, Counsel
for Defendant 5 Adv. Yaron Barzilai On behalf of Adv. Liran Zilberman, Counsel for
defendant 6 Adv. Itai Rozin on behalf of Adv. Nadav Greenwald, counsel for
defendant 7 absent with court permission, counsel for defendant 8 absent with court
permission, defendant no. 1 defendant 1 absent with court permission, defendant 2
appeared, defendant 3 absent with court permission, defendant 4 appeared, defendant
5 did not appear, announced that he would arrive late, Defendant 6 appeared,
defendant 7 was absent with court permission, defendant 8 was absent with court
permission. Court note: The defendants' absences at today's meeting were approved
by agreement of the parties when there is agreement that the hearing will take
place in their absence.
A.T/9 Maj. Mazal Yochai, after being legally warned, responds in cross-examination
to attorney Omri Rosenberg:
Hon. H.S. Brody: On the witness stand stands Sergeant Major Mazal Yochai, she is
witness 9 in the indictment. In fact, she testified before us afterwards, she
returned to the witness stand once and now she actually comes in a third and
Attorney Rom will say a few sentences so that we will have it on the record, yes.
Before her testimony.
Attorney Rom: So as I said before, the witness today is a third time in court, on
January 31, 22, a primary interrogation came, cross-examination by Adv. Sudri and a
re-examination by Adv. Hadad, and then in fact she was asked by Adv. Sudri to
provide him with some kind of trail of exhibits and then he asked to return her for
questioning about the same voucher and she did come back again on February 3rd,
Sorry, on February 8, 22nd and she was interrogated again by Adv. Sudari, even then
my friend Adv. Barzilai also asked to interrogate her, he could not do so at the
time and we agreed that she would come again to be questioned only about the really
specific issue of the exhibit related to his client Roi Ashkenazi and it is
important for me to note the boundaries.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Remove worry from your heart.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: I think that the boundaries of the decree are indisputable. Ok.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Good morning, Lucky.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Good morning.
Q: I am Omri Rosenberg, I and Adv. Barzilai represent Defendant 4 Roy Ashkenazi. So
like I said, everyone can take worry out of their hearts, there will be a very
brief, focused investigation about the issues related to my client Roy Ashkenazi,
okay? Now, you were really interrogated twice by Attorney Sudri and you also had a
refresher on December 28, 21, remember that, right?
A: Less, but.
Recorder: More loudly.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay.
Recorder: Repeat the answer.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I said less, remember that there were, all right.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay, I'll just point out for the record that it was submitted
as T/402 Now I just saw that you just sat down with Adv. Rom and she presented you
with things, another refresher, explain to me exactly what you watched?
ATTORNEY ROM: Wait, first, what's the question?
ATTORNEY ROENBERG: I saw that she was on the computer watching all kinds of
materials.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, she read her testimony, her interrogation last time.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: All right. Ok. So since I'm really focused, I'm actually
dressing up for an investigation by Attorney Sudari, I do want to go back both for
the ensemble and for everyone here to understand what your role is, at the end of
the day, very briefly I'll go over a few points with you and just confirm to me
that it really is.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Is there any specific document that you would like to investigate
her about?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes, I will submit.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Then show us so that it will be before us.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Obviously, I'll submit it when I get there.
Hon. H.S. Brody: All right.
Attorney Rosenberg: So in fact you said that you were responsible for the warehouse
and depositing exhibits and basically described the conduct on the day of the
outbreak that you were in the AFI Hall and the police officers who actually seized
the exhibits in the houses during the search came, placed them at your place and
the registration operation began.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: That's right.
Q: Right? Now, the registration operation itself had thousands of exhibits, right?
A: That's right.
Q: Now, you didn't actually list all the exhibits, there were other police officers
there, did you?
A: That's right.
Q: Beautiful. Will you confirm that one of the other policemen was Chen Kogman?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Grace?
Attorney Rosenberg: Chen Kogman?
Q: Right? Beautiful. Now that you've divided the work between you, have you
randomly divided it per defendant, per crate? How was the division?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Of the registry?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Of the registry?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: No, it's clear to me, I'm trying to remember. We tried per
suspect, to tell you in practice what it was like? I don't remember.
Q: Okay. Only I will present you with a table that you edited with Cogman about the
exhibits that he himself edited.
ATTORNEY ROM: Was that submitted?
Attorney Rosenberg: I will also submit to the court.
ATTORNEY ROM: Has it been filed a shoulder yet?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: It wasn't submitted, there are also some copies if you will.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Thank you very much.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, what do we have here in the table here?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: It's barcode 8983.
The Honourable H. Tamir: 8983.
Attorney Rosenberg: Could there be 4 copies there?
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, there are only 2 here.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: 2?
Hon. H.S. Brody: I have a question for the parties.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Another copy.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Could be. Thank you.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: This is something that is possible.
Hon. H.S. Brody: I think it might be worthwhile, with your permission, to mark it
as an appendix to the rest of the prosecution exhibits that will not be interrupted
in due course.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I don't have a problem, nor do I necessarily have to submit
it.
Attorney Rom: So there's T/366, which is the full list of exhibits that we
submitted.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's right. I thought T/366A.
ATTORNEY ROM: Yes, it could be.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Note for the record, although the defense submitted the exhibits,
which is fine, but in order to keep things in order, we concentrate the exhibits
under the testimony of the witness Mazal, we receive the document, which is the
receipt and registration of exhibits, which is the appendix to the table, and mark
P/366A.
Attorney Rosenberg: Shiri, what was the drum of the table?
Adv. Rom: T/366.
Hon. H.S. Brody: The previous chart that was?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: 366 That would be 366A.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So in fact the table that was submitted through you is a
comprehensive table that in fact in the previous discussion you removed it from the
system of all the exhibits in this case in this case, right?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I'd love to see what it's all about, but.
Q: A centralized table that is not divided about who registered, but in general
about everyone who registered.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Pick up the phone that vibrates, please, from the table.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Good.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay? Now, I point you to the sixth page of Chen Kogman's
table, okay? Also count the title on the front page, 1, 2, it's not numbered
simply.
A: Are you talking about K88?
Q: Barcode 8983, okay? The sixth page.
Hon. H.S. Brody: To the table or at all to the whole material?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: No, just for the table, but a sixth page that includes the
first page of the headline.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Including Thursday or not? Count.
Hon. Barak Nevo: The sixth page is the last page.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: No.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: This is one before the last.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: One before last. It's a smarter way to look.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: In the upper right corner 81279204.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That's right.
The Honourable Barak Nevo: 4.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay, focus on that. I refer you to the last line, see?
Samsung Blue Mobile.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Yes. Yes.
Q: Roy Ashkenazi's.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, wait.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Beautiful.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Just a second.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Item number 8921?
Hon. Barak Nevo: The narrator, moment, second, second. We have so many details, the
first rubric is the number shown, right?
A: Yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: 812 for the record, 7904, yes?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That's the page, I'm talking about the last exhibit right now.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: The latter.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, sorry, it's not, so tell me.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: 921 at the end?
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Okay, wait.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Item number.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So the number that is being said now is not the number but the
number shown is polished on page 6 81278921.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Fine, so this is the phone I'm talking about right now during
the interrogation, okay?
Q: So let's just confirm to me that it's actually a phone written by Chen Kogman?
A: Confirms.
Q: Beautiful. Now, after the act of drawing, Chen Kogman wrote it down in your epic
hall, okay? The exhibits actually moved to the exhibit warehouse, right?
A: Not exactly, no.
Q: Explain.
A: Because there was a large number of exhibits, it took several days to register
the exhibits, some of the exhibits still remained in an epic hall apart from drugs
and money.
Hon. Barak Nevo: I don't hear you, you come down aloud at the end of the answer.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: I say because of the large number of exhibits that were
in the file.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Yes.
A: It took several days to write down the exhibits.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: It took several days to register the exhibits, part of
the time it remained in the epic courtroom, locked at the end of the day, except
for the drugs and money.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Just out loud, please.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Except?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Drugs and finances.
Attorney Barzilai: Drugs and finances.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: All right.
Hon. H.S. Brody: A moment apart from finances and?
Hon. S. Barak Nevo: Drugs.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Drugs.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, of course. Ok.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Right now, as I told you, no.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: And not immediately.
Q: Look, we're just focusing.
A: I say big, okay, in an epic hall.
Q: I'm only talking to you about cell phones.
A: Good.
Q: Digital media and currently specifically about this particular phone of Roy
Ashkenazi.
A: Good.
Q: Okay? Now you said, if you want I will also refer you in the previous protocol
that this whole process of registering exhibits in an epic hall took 3, 4 days, a
second, that the exhibits after their registration moved to the exhibits warehouse
that it was in the shelter that we will talk about soon in fact or at the end that
at the end of the 3rd, 4 days or in between, this is what you said, will you only
confirm to me that it is true?
A: It's again in this case that it didn't immediately move to the exhibit
warehouse.
Q: Okay.
A: Okay? Because there was a multitude of exhibits, this researcher also moved to
ZIT.
Hon. S. Barak Nevo: 39?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: To ZIT, yes, to the test that simply examines all the
exhibits, all the cell phones.
Hon. H.S. Brody: What went to ZIT? What is this?
A: A technological arena.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No.
A: What?
Hon. H.S. Brody: What has passed?
A: The exhibits.
Hon. H.S. Brody: 'This' means.
A: All computer displays, cell phones.
Hon. H.S. Brody: All the exhibits, wait, it might be worth saying for the record,
all computer displays, yes, phones.
A: Phones, disk on key, memory card, all the computer exhibits that it passed on to
the trained researchers who will look into it there.
Hon. H.S. Brody: All exhibits that are a technological arena.
A: That's right.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So let me just understand.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, wait, just a second. Go to ZIT, yes.
Attorney Rosenberg: So let me just understand, there have been cases, you're
saying, that the exhibits did not pass directly from the Effie Hall from the
registration to the shelter to the exhibits warehouse, but in the way they passed
through the ZIT, through the extraction?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: The way of extraction, yes.
Q: Fine, where can I have any indication of this transition between actually
registration and ZIT?
A: What do you mean?
Q: How do I know that it really went to ZIT?
A: The investigator's action report is skilled.
Q: That's it, an action report?
A: Yes.
Q: And if I don't have an action report then that means it hasn't passed?
A: There is an action report, all exhibits have action reports of the exhibits.
Q: The ZIT's?
A: Of the extraction, of the researcher.
Q: But actually of the transition, if I don't have an action report that says.
A: The evidence extraction section was during the period under cyber, so it's
supposedly possible.
Hon. H.S. Brody: You're talking to him and it's very hard to hear you.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: I say from the Evidence Extraction Section.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes.
A: Until last April it was under the cyber unit, the file belongs to the cyber
unit, so supposedly stayed inside the house and also because again multiple
exhibits and try as if to expedite the checks so that there would be no delays it
went straight to the extraction department that I am also a coordinator there and
responsible for.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Got it.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: On the distribution of exhibits to researchers.
Q: Okay. So I mean, because of the overload of exhibits, it actually went sometimes
directly to the ZIT that relies on the action report, okay, let's move forward.
Hon. H.S. Brody: What is it directly?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: What do you mean?
Hon. S. Brody: First, something here is unclear, first of all everything was in an
epic hall.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Everything includes from the technological arena as well, right?
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That was the first stop.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Second stop, it goes to exhaustion.
A: That's right.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's supposed to be a report on what's going on?
ATTORNEY ROM: First of all, no, but that's after registration.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: This is after registration.
Hon. H.S. Brody: You take notes.
A: Registration after registration.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, we say so, concentrated on my nose, then there's a listing,
right?
A: After registering the exhibit.
A: There is also a deposit.
A: Of the exhibit he receives a sticker and the number of the item is supposedly as
if in a warehouse.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, a second, and then those exhibits that move on to
exhaustion, what about them?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Every interrogator received a box with the exhibits of a
particular suspect, we divided the exhibits in boxes according to suspects, each
interrogator placed a box next to him with the exhibits of that suspect and then he
examined it.
Hon. H.S. Brody: The station, but the next one, after you put it there, you wrote
it down, everything.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And it goes to exhaustion, are there any reports on what goes to
extraction? Or this, how do you document it?
A: There wasn't, wasn't, sometimes, wasn't because it's also inside the house, it's
also because I'm a professional coordinator and in the end everything passes
through me and I'm also the warehouse manager, so supposedly staying in the same
house.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait.
A: In short because of the multiplicity of exhibits.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And then it comes to exhaustion and what happens?
A: Each investigator received a box with the same suspect with all the exhibits of
that suspect and he examined them.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And he?
A: Test them by prioritizing exhibits at the time.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And after that?
A: After that, it comes back to me in the warehouse.
Hon. H.S. Brody: He came back to you, is that what actually happened?
A: Yes. At the end of this whole process, I printed out all the concepts of the
entire file of all the exhibits in the file and went through a box to make sure
that all the exhibits existed and entered the warehouse.
A: And there was no lack either.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That is, after he returned from the trip, everything returned to
his certificate.
A: For the warehouse, yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: To the warehouse.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait. "I made sure everything was back in the warehouse."
A: That's right. There were no shortages.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Now only, lucky, that we will simply understand the documents in
due course, this table also reflects the rule.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: The exhibits?
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: What language did you explain, the table we submitted today
T/366A.
Attorney Rom: No, that's just what Chen Kogman wrote.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Cogman, all right, there were.
Adv. Rom: T/366.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: No, 366 is all.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's what you're testifying to.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, but you asked her now if it includes everything? T/366.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's right.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Including everything.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So Cogman's also goes into what she tells us.
A: It's part of the totality of the tables, yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Okay, this is one of the boxes that one of the researchers took.
A: No, Cogman's chart is not according to, it's all the exhibits he listed.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Okay.
A: In the same case.
A: It's not by box.
Hon. H.S. Brody: All right. Wait a minute. Very well. It is possible to
investigate, yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: We will continue, we will touch on this point a little more
deeply, but I just want to move forward with you on a few more points. So we said
you actually got the devices into your hands the ones you got, some you didn't get,
it was registered in the epic hall and you got the phones, right?
Hon. Barak Nevo: I didn't understand.
Attorney Rosenberg: You received phones when they were caught in searches, you
received phones into your hands because they are occupied as exhibits.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, but in the middle you said what part you did not receive for
registration.
Attorney Rosenberg: Again, you said that there were several police officers who
registered Chen Kogman among them, you were also one of them.
Q: Now, I'm talking about you because you don't know what Chen Cogman did. When you
received phone calls as an exhibit, do you know what their status was? What's off,
on?
A: According to how I actually get it, it can be off, it can be on.
Q: Beautiful. Airplane mode, you don't know in the end, some of your actions aren't
really,
A: As far as I remember, we didn't deal with registration, we didn't.
Q: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: "We did not deal with this but with registration."
THE WITNESS, Maj. Yochai: In the registry, yes.
Attorney Rosenberg: I understood, now, I'm just referring you to Attorney Sudry's
interrogation, you actually confirmed that when you received cellular devices for
registration, you didn't test them at all, I mean, you don't know not off, not on,
not airplane mode, as far as you're concerned, it comes with a SIM inside, a SIM
outside, you don't know, you get a phone as is, you don't care what its condition
is and register it?
A: I wrote it down, yes.
Q: All right.
Attorney Rosenberg: Now, at the end of the day, you're saying that the exhibits,
I'm talking about Roy's phone right now, but you can apply that to all the
exhibits, obviously you won't remember Roy's phone specifically, they came at the
end of the day to the exhibits warehouse, which is the shelter that was converted
into an exhibits warehouse, right?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: You say at the end of the day at the end yes, again, in the
middle it went to the skilled investigator for examination.
Q: Okay.
A: I don't know what your end is, what part do you mean?
Q: During the process, I mean during 4, 5, 6 days after registration, could it
still remain in the ZIT?
A: Could be.
Q: Could be. Ok. Now, as far as the warehouse is concerned, what are the procedures
of the warehouse of the shelter that was there at that time, is there a key there?
A: Yes.
Q: Who, you're in charge of the screen, right?
A: Me and the investigating officer, yes.
Q: My name is the Investigations Officer?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Lucky, it's hard to hear you, sorry.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I am in charge of the warehouse.
A: And Amir Lavon.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: And Emery Lavon.
Q: Again about the warehouse, I'm not talking about the epic hall, the warehouse
exhibits, the shelter?
A: It's kind of both, and it's like he's in charge of the case.
Q: All right. Now, in terms of a key for both the Effi hall and the warehouse, do
you and Amir have a key?
A: This shelter has one key that passed between Amir and me.
Q: And to the epic hall?
A: But Effie I don't remember how, I don't remember how the key turned.
Hon. Barak Nevo: When you say 'in the shelter,' the entire exhibit warehouse of
this file was in the shelter or was it smooth and smooth? Or is the exhibit
warehouse in the shelter at all?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: At the end of the day, he arrived at the shelter, as if the
shelter were serving as a warehouse of cyber exhibits.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay.
A: At the end of the day, from there I manage the exhibits.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: All right. This was a general background that really focused
on the investigation first.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's the final endpoint, actually.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay? We talked about the background of your previous
investigation mainly and now I'm talking to you about Roy Ashkenazi and his phone,
now, in the interrogation of Adv. Sudri he referred you to a traffic ticket marked
N/125 regarding his client Ofir Michel, do you remember that?
Hon. S. Barak Nevo: Nun?
Adv. Rosenberg: 125. Do you remember?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I don't remember, but talk and I will.
Q: No, okay, okay.
A: We'll respond to what you need.
Q: Beautiful. I actually have a report in my hand called "Item Data Presentation,"
OK? Which we call a traffic ticket.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Traffic ticket?
ATTORNEY ROENBERG: Traffic ticket. Ok? Now, you explained that this report is
actually a chain of exhibits.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: For the same item, yes.
Q: For the same item.
A: Yes.
Q: Can you explain to me what a necklace is displayed for that item?
A: There is the chain, as the item chain appears below and there are all the
journal lines of her name made with the item.
Q: Okay. So if we really go through the traffic report regarding Ofir Michel we see
Aviv Dror Cohen adding an item.
A: Yes.
Q: Is it actually the listing adding the item?
A: This is the listing of the exhibit.
Q: Okay, we see an item deposit later.
A: That's right.
Q: And then on March 17 we really see a transfer to Lahav for evidence extraction,
a transfer to the Lahav Evidence Extraction Unit.
Attorney Barzilai: Is the court following me?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Here.
Attorney Barzilai: No, no, fine. All good.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's why we're here, isn't it?
ATTORNEY BARZILAI: No, no, ma'am, the question was asked in the form.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Everything is fine.
Attorney Barzilai: That's not what I meant, God forbid.
Hon. H.S. Brody: I know.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay?
A: Yes.
Q: Beautiful. So actually again if I ask in the title, what is the document and
what is its function? It's basically seeing all the actions, the whole chain of
actions that we're doing with this exhibit, right?
A: That's right.
Q: Registration, deposit, extraction of evidence, transfer, even actions that are
not physically related to the device but also actions.
A: Everything you see is related to the item itself, there are no things here that
are not related to this item.
Q: No, I'm saying related to the item, but also not, if they specifically removed
it from the warehouse, for example if you need an extension of occupancy in court
will you have a sign that you need to do it?
A: That's right, I made a request, yes.
Q: Beautiful. Now, you also gave as an example in the interrogation of Attorney
Sudri that if you actually bring someone an item from the warehouse, you actually
take an item out of the warehouse, you take out a voucher, a voucher called
'removing an item from the warehouse,' and then, in fact, when this action happens
automatically, we get this rubric, the line in a traffic ticket?
A: There's a voucher that it's a transfer transaction, a display transfer, okay?
Q: Fine, so I say, when you put out a voucher, what does it entail? You're in
offices in a featured warehouse, right?
A: I'm on my computer, yes.
Q: On the computer, tap a voucher and then give the item to the same police officer
who requested?
A: That's right. That's big time, yes.
Q: Right and then it automatically updates on this traffic report that I issue
later, right?
A: Yes.
Q: So now really what is called from the general to the individual, we talked about
Ofir Michel and we will now talk about Roy Ashkenazi's phone.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, we just didn't hear very well, if you make any use of this
exhibit is updated and its movement is updated in the document?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: If I take or insert the exhibit from the warehouse, there is
a line that is updated.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: According to the voucher that is issued.
Q: So I file a traffic ticket, I ask to file a traffic ticket.
ATTORNEY ROM: Show me just what.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Traffic ticket, I'll give you also, traffic report of Roy
Ashkenazi's phone item number 81278921.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Can you bring me more readable?
ATTORNEY ROM: I have a more readable one.
Hon. H.S. Brody: We will check the page number. Yes.
ATTORNEY ROM: It's more readable.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Thank you very much.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: It is N/125B because there is A.
Hon. Barak Nevo: How much?
Hon. H.S. Tamir: It's N/125.
Hon. Barak Nevo: But it's someone else's, so why do it in?
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Is it someone else's?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Yes, yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Now he is a giver of Ashkenazi shepherds.
Hon. H.S. Brody: It is possible in sequence for the exhibits because I have nowhere
to put it.
Hon. H.S. Brody: The last exhibit of the defense was N/155.
The Honourable H.S. Tamir: 155.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes? Adv. Rom, will you help us, N/155 in the documents, is this
the last exhibit?
ATTORNEY ROM: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Thank you.
<#3#>
Decision
The document entitled Presentation of item data number 81278921 refers to the phone
seized from the defendant Roy Ashkenazi, the traffic ticket is received and marked
N/156.
The announcement can be made today, 12/01/2023 in the presence of those present.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge
Michael Tamir, Judge
Hon. H.S. Brody: The judge here, please, there is a clearer copy of the file.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Is there anything clearer?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes. Already. This is the source in quotation marks. Here, please.
Hon. Barak Nevo: I have, all right.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, please.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay? So you looked at the report?
Q: Okay. So with your permission, we'll go over the report together.
A: Good.
Q: Beautiful. So from earlier we saw that the first action that happened in the
exhibit was the drawing, the drawing by Chen Kogman, right?
A: Yes.
Q: You see it in the front row on March 12 at 8:24 am Item added by Chen Kogman,
okay?
A: Good.
Q: The second action is already related to you. In fact, the next day you mention
that you deposited the item in the warehouse, right? At 10:56 a.m.
A: Yes.
Q: So going back to my previous question.
A: Again depositing an item into the warehouse is not because I actually took the
exhibit physically and went into the warehouse, okay? Depositing an item into the
warehouse shows that an item sticker has supposedly been taken out and it is with
me.
Q: Okay.
A: Okay?
ATTORNEY ROM: Virtual, like.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: What?
Attorney Rom: Virtual deposit.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait. A kind of virtual deposit that is actually a voucher
generation?
A: Deposit sticker.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Producing a sticker, yes.
A: per item.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Item sticker.
A: Yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: When can I tell?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Does that give effect to the deposit actually?
The witness, Maj. Yochai: Actually, gives the validity from the initial
registration that it has already been registered in the system.
A: Then there is the second stage the so-called deposit to the registration unit.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now, when can I know when it's virtual and when it's not?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: It's a little hard for me to answer this virtual question.
Q: I'll sharpen my question.
A: Because it's not.
Q: I want to understand when you write here 'depositing an item into the warehouse'
I am for this item in the warehouse, that's what a chain is displayed for, right?
A: He's supposedly, he's not physically really in the warehouse.
Q: So where is he?
A: I told you again in this case that there are cases where it went straight to a
skilled investigator and they carried out the examination.
(Pause in recording).
Q: Okay, because there were a lot of exhibits and everything.
A: Because of the multitude of exhibits, because of coming and checking.
Q: Got it.
A: Yes, expedites.
Q: Okay. Beautiful.
A: But let's just say it's under my responsibility.
Q: Okay.
A: Okay?
Q: Beautiful. So actually the second action, as we said, the next morning you took
out a sticker, a deposit, the phone, now you're saying that it necessarily went to
ZIT or extraction or could it be that it was in an exhibits warehouse? I just
didn't get it.
A: It may also have been in an exhibit warehouse until they decided when it would
move to ZIT.
Q: Could be. Very well. Beautiful. Let's move on to the third action.
A: The third is going to court.
Q: Beautiful. Action.
A: You turned a simple page, so no.
Q: No, right.
A: In the back.
Q: Right, quite the opposite, right.
A: For me, it's different, well.
Attorney Barzilai: Never mind.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: All right.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay. So the third next action is from September 5, 2019 at
11:48 a.m. going to court that you're actually a signatory to this action, right?
A: Yes, it is an application to a court for an extension of the validity of
exhibits.
Q: Beautiful. Now, so again, I'll just refine this, the first action was on March
12th the registration, action was the next day on March 13th there was a deposit by
you.
A: Yes.
Q: And the third subsequent action according to the traffic report is on September
5, 2019, i.e., six months later?
A: Yes.
Q: Right? In fact the third action again we will repeat, the first action
registration, the second action deposit, in fact during this time according to the
traffic report six months nothing happened with the phone, what is your reaction?
A: Just by the traffic you see here, but I told you again, the exhibits were taken
by skilled researchers who examined the exhibits.
Q: Look what it is, a traffic ticket You also talked about it in the previous
investigation with Attorney Sudri and we just talked about it at the beginning of
the investigation, the meaning of a traffic ticket is a chain of introduces, right?
A: Yes.
Q: What is the function of a featured chain?
A: Show the processes and what happened with the exhibit.
Q: Beautiful, from beginning to end.
A: Yes.
Q: Right? Now, how long have you been working as an exhibit registrar or exhibit
warehouse manager?
A: 5 years.
Q: 5 years.
Hon. Barak Nevo: One second, just let's clarify the beginning of the process,
because you said that regarding the first few days, there is some kind of physical
ambiguity about where the phone was, because it could have been in the ZIT and it
could have been in your warehouse, right?
Hon. Barak Nevo: So let's say this process took a few days, let's take 10 days in a
big way.
A: Good.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Is that okay? Is it reasonable?
A: In the case of this case it is less likely, again because of the large number of
exhibits that were in the file.
Hon. Barak Nevo: So how long could it have been in the ZIT and not in the
warehouse?
A: I don't know how to tell you.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Order of magnitude, month?
A: I really don't know how to tell you, I don't know how to answer that.
Hon. Barak Nevo: I understood, which means that actually somewhere between the
registration and the date of the referral to the Rishon LeZion Magistrate's Court,
somewhere in the middle he was in ZIT, the issue of producing the sticker doesn't
give us anything in terms of the physical location of this phone and you can't tell
us where it really was, when, during this period between registration and between,
It was either in the drone or in the warehouse, is that what you're telling us?
A: Yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay. So again you actually don't know not on 14 where he was,
not on 15, not on 16 and so on.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: What is it? Again, either in the ZIT or in the warehouse.
Q: Okay.
A: I told you at the end of the day I checked all the exhibits in this file and
they all entered the warehouse without any lack either.
Hon. Barak Nevo: When is this test that you did?
The witness, Maj. Yochai: I don't remember to say when, but at the end of the
process of examining all the exhibits in the file.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Order of magnitude, a year, six months, a month?
A: What?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Two months? From the moment of registration.
ATTORNEY ROM: From the hack.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: From the breakthrough.
A: It could be maybe two months, maybe a month.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay, so you do point us at a point in time where for sure the
phone came back to you because you checked the warehouse and everything was already
in the warehouse.
A: Yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: So you do narrow back my referral to the court, first I tried to
see.
A: So it's a lot assuming it's well before September, yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay, so we've actually reduced the amount of time you don't know
where the exhibit was.
A: A lot.
Attorney Barzilai: We have reduced a lot.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: It's not that I don't know, it's either in the ZIT or in the
warehouse.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, no, I understood.
A: But yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: I say between these two places.
A: But long before, long before.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Two months, you say?
A: Something like that.
Hon. Barak Nevo: In other words, the magnitude of the end of May is it certain that
it was already in the warehouse?
A: He may have been before, too, but I haven't done the test yet.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Yes, yes, I understood, I understood.
A: I was waiting for the end of the exhibits.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Got it, okay.
A: Do a test.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay, so when you did the test, maybe two months after the
outbreak, everything was already in the warehouse, including this phone?
A: I guess, you could say yes.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: There are always other movements.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now look.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, just a second.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Excuse me.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Please.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now look at your claim that the exhibits on display could be
either in a ZIT or in a warehouse, right?
The witness, Maj. Yochai: Either at the ZIT or in the warehouse or at the
investigating unit.
Q: Beautiful. Now, I again I just want to understand and refine it. March 13th.
A: Yes.
Q: Who had the phone? Name? Do you have anything to tell me?
A: No.
Q: No. On the 14th?
A: No, I have no idea.
Q: You don't know. All right. Now, how can you rule out, for that matter, for
example, that the phone was not in the warehouse or warehouse on display? In the
warehouse exhibits or in the ZIT? Excuse me.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Or with the investigating unit?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Or with the investigating unit?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Again, if I can, what?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Can you rule out?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Deny, can you? Once again.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: It was or, in one of these three places.
Q: Okay, now, on what basis are you saying that? That's my question.
A: There is the unit investigating the cyber unit that they can too, there are also
skilled investigators to examine the device and the extraction unit also has the
skilled investigators, I don't know what was decided at that time who will test
this device?
Q: So at the end of the day you can't know that for sure from.
A: You can tell who checked based on the action report of that skilled
investigator.
Q: Just according to who checked, if I tell you that the phone was checked for that
matter on March 17 then I have a gap from the 13th to the 17th you can't tell where
the phone was?
ATTORNEY ROM: You keep repeating it and she keeps saying you can tell where he was.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: But again I tell you.
ATTORNEY ROM: He was either in ZIT or in one or the other.
ATTORNEY ROSIN: Shiri, she is under cross-examination.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, but.
ATTORNEY ROSIN: No, don't say no.
Hon. Barak Nevo: He asks between these three places.
ATTORNEY ROM: Between the three, so let him ask like this, not 'You can't know
where he was.'
Hon. Barak Nevo: All right.
ATTORNEY ROM: It wasn't in my pocket.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Between these three places.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: As far as I'm concerned, there aren't three places, you say.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: What is none?
Hon. H.S. Brody: There is no argument about that.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, he has an argument.
Hon. Barak Nevo: That's what he's trying to tell her.
ATTORNEY ROM: Exactly, it's always going backwards.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She also says lucky that between the three places she can't.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, but he says, 'I also deny that it was in one of these three
places.'
Hon. H.S. Brody: Good.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That's right. I ask how can you know? You say that's the
procedure, that's what's customary, can you know for sure where this phone was at
that time besides, this, this?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: So again I tell you, it could be either in the ZIT or in the
extraction unit or in the warehouse or in the cyber unit there are skilled
investigators there who will examine the device, okay?
Q: Can you rule out that someone took this phone and one of the investigators took,
maybe accidentally, the phone home, can you rule it out?
A: No one will take home.
Q: Won't take home.
A: No one will take home.
Q: Okay, okay. Now, I'll tell you where my problem is, Lucky.
A: Say, we'll solve.
Q: That in this six months, okay? A few actions happened on the phone, okay? In
fact, according to the action reports that you said the police officers did, that
police officers carried out over the phone.
A: Good.
Q: Okay? One of the actions is Maxim Yudkiewicz's phone hacking report from March
17, 19, Shiri, it was filed or it wasn't filed, right?
ATTORNEY ROM: It wasn't filed, it can be submitted.
Adv. Barzilai: Barcode 2857.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Accessible.
ATTORNEY ROM: There is also a copy report.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Second, there are several reports.
ATTORNEY ROM: It comes with a copy report.
Attorney Rosenberg: You don't have to submit it just maybe to the court for review,
I'll bring it up. I only have one copy, I'm sorry, it's 2 reports. I present it to
you as well.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: So you don't want to submit?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I don't want to submit it just to present it.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: Is that bad for you? So.
Attorney Barzilai: No, no.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: I'm kidding.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: No, it's just. Now, I'm referring you to Maxim Yudkiewicz's
hacking report barcode 2857 that he claims he basically says he hacked the phone on
March 17th, okay?
Q: Now again my question how can I know when he got the call? Who did he get the
phone from?
A: Come on, again, I'm telling you again the warehouse, the evidence extraction
unit under the house of cyber, okay? I don't take out anything, from the beginning
I told you that there were no so-called transfer vouchers inside this because of
the multitude of exhibits and every skilled investigator got a box with a box with
the suspect's name on it and checked its exhibits, okay? You won't read a transfer,
you won't always see a transfer, okay? You won't always see a transfer of who
checked and who did, there's the action report of the same skilled investigator who
did the test, the line here that you marked me in pink that he finally put it in
this exhibits drawer.
Q: I marked it for myself, but okay.
A: No matter, so I'll address it because it's marked, it's automatic because let's
1000 exhibits don't fit in one drawer that's in it, it could be that it was lying
down, put it probably in the same box as that suspect, at the end of the day I
checked that everything was returned to the warehouse with the whole list of
exhibits that were in the file.
Q: So I am.
A: It could also remain in extraction, in extraction, okay? Extracted in a box
until I put it in the warehouse.
Q: Okay.
A: Now you won't see a transfer voucher for return and transfer because supposedly
it's the warehouse that's the house, it's cyber, so I have nothing to spend and
it's inside the house.
Q: Okay.
A: Okay? You won't always see this movement.
Q: What if I show you other cases that did?
A: I said you won't always see this movement, I told you again.
Q: Not always.
A: It's a big bag, there were stages that calmed down a bit in the bag and yes I
could issue transfer and return vouchers when there was free time for it,
eventually, I'll be back again, I did a brief on all the exhibits in the file and
everything was completed and everything was full and nothing was missing for any
suspect.
Q: Now.
A: What is it now?
Q: Two months later you did.
A: I can't tell you exactly in two months, but I did brief at the end and checked
that everything was normal.
Q: Okay.
A: That the warehouse is fully booked.
Q: Everything is fine. The question is what happened in between, so we'll talk
shortly.
A: What happened was either in the extraction or in the warehouse.
Q: Fine, come explain it to me.
A: Or the Cyber Unit.
Q: You talked here about the exhibit drawer, what is the drawer where it is in this
drawer's storage room?
A: No, it has to do with the Evidence Extraction Unit, where we provide a solution
for all Lahav units and each unit has its own drawer to insert the exhibits
according to the file, according to the unit.
Q: Okay. Let's go over another action, this is actually the additional document I
brought you.
A: Which is?
Q: A second penetration of the phone by Gilbert Greco on February 5, 19 was marked
with barcode 2863.
A: I don't see what you're talking about.
Q: Sorry. Take. Is it in front of my lady?
A: Yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: The document?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Here is what we have 18.3.19.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: And there is another document.
Hon. H. Brody: And at 5.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: In February.
Hon. H.S. Brody: In April.
Attorney Barzilai: On April 5.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Let me read it for a moment.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: No problem.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Further examination, yes?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay. All right. So here we see another phone hack that was
carried out in April: Roy Ashkenazi's phone.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That it is marked, you do not submit, in the investigation file K-
58C and 23 also. Good.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now, even this intrusion has no reference or description in
the chain shown in the traffic report, right?
Q: Beautiful.
A: And yet.
Q: Now.
A: We are still in the rush period of the exhibits in the file.
Q: Got it, now.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Excuse me?
Hon. Barak Nevo: This is during the rush period of exhibits in the file.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: We are still in the rush period.
Attorney Rosenberg: I mean, the initial registration was on March 12, actually, the
seizure of the exhibits was on March 12, we're going almost a month ahead and
you're still saying.
A: Much less.
Q: Almost.
A: Okay.
Q: A few weeks, two weeks, 3, however you want. And still there is no indication
that the phone was deposited in the exhibits warehouse in the end, there is no
indication in the traffic ticket.
A: It was deposited in the warehouse because there is the sticker, again I told you
that there were movements here with the exhibit during the period of the whole load
of the bag of the beginning of the break-in.
Q: When I say indication there is no registration.
A: No registration, what do you want to know if there was a registration for
Gilbert?
Q: Any registration you are responsible for warehouse are displayed, registration
where the device is located at that time?
Hon. Barak Nevo: So she told you that inside the house.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: So I said no.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Good.
Hon. Barak Nevo: These movements did not receive registration, they did not always
receive registration.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: Not in this case, at least, because there was a load of
people involved and presented.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Beautiful. So we said there was congestion, right? And we said
that you have not been careful at the moment about the matter of the chain
presented in preparation for the traffic report in terms of the deposit where it
was at any given moment.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She doesn't say she wasn't careful.
ATTORNEY ROM: Again, we disagree.
Hon. H.S. Brody: It wasn't, she didn't say that.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Mrs. Rom.
ATTORNEY ROM: Let him not put into words.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Mrs. Rom.
Attorney Barzilai: No one puts in a word.
Hon. Barak Nevo: The judge already.
Attorney Barzilai: And things are clear. Traffic ticket.
Hon. Barak Nevo: The judge started to make a comment, if you hadn't gone in you
would have heard her say what you wanted to say. Please.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, all right, that's already the case.
Hon. Barak Nevo: I think you talked together.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Well, all right.
ATTORNEY ROM: Excuse me.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She explained several times that inside the house there was no
need to make separate reports.
Hon. H.S. Brody: In this case, when there was a load of things there, that's how it
went.
Hon. S. Brody: But it was actually in the same house, she says that in the end,
even at the end of all the endings, she made the final list and everything came.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: All right. So how good it is.
Hon. H.S. Brody: It's basically the same as the first penetration, it's basically
the same answer.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay. So how good it is that we have Attorney Sudri who
investigated exactly the same subject.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: And he's basically like I filed, you have it before you,
right? N/125 is the traffic report of, N/125 regarding Ofir Michel.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Ofir Michel. Yes.
ATTORNEY ROM: But there is no need to repeat Attorney Sudari's interrogation.
Attorney Barzilai: Nobody, second.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I am not repeating the investigation.
Attorney Barzilai: Second, second, Shiri, the person is investigating, he doesn't
put words, respect him, don't disturb, if he's not misleading, don't interrupt, let
him investigate.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, no.
ATTORNEY ROM: No. So what to investigate again about everything Sudri has just
researched?
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, no.
(Talking together).
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: The interrogation is very brief.
Attorney Barzilai: I say again, it's not me investigating, let him investigate.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Just a second, just a second, just a second. First of all we
understood that this is a short investigation, no need to repeat things, if you
want a map to go out for something then you can ask.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Madam.
Hon. S. Brody: It's not such a disaster, so there will be 5 more questions, not too
bad.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Madam, I'm very focused and also when I turn.
Hon. H.S. Brody: You heard what I said.
Hon. H.S. Brody: We trust that you won't repeat things.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That she has already testified to them, if you need them for a
specific purpose then refresh her memory and ask further. Yes, so you say about
N/125 related to Ofir Michel.
Attorney Rosenberg: I refer you to the third operation that was carried out on
March 17, in fact on March 17 Ofir Michel's phone was hacked and Roy Ashkenazi's
phone also happened to be hacked, right? Do you see that?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: It's not by chance, there are a number of investigators who
received the exhibits.
Q: Okay, let alone that.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Coincidentally in quotation marks.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That's right. Beautiful. Mouth.
Hon. H.S. Brody: You say while about Ophir.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Beautiful, a very focused comparison. While regarding Ofir,
there is a detailed breakdown of all the actions performed on the phone.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait. I want a moment to see it. Where is N/125? Is this name
documented to have been infiltrated?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes, here, it's in front of you, ma'am?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, before us. Just need to do.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Then I'll come back.
ATTORNEY ROM: Wait, wait, wait.
Hon. H.S. Brody: In a binder, second.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Excuse me.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: It's N/125.
ATTORNEY ROM: Wait for them to take a look.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Where is it listed?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I refer to the second page in the third line from the bottom.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Transfer to Lahav Extraction of evidence for the purpose of
quantity.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes, and later on the 18th.
The Honourable H.S. Tamir: Depositing an item into the warehouse and adding a
telephone item.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So we will complete the sentence that we interrupted, while
regarding Ofir there was an individual registration inside the house as well, this
was not the case with Roy Ashkenazi, yes, that is the question?
Attorney Barzilai: Precise.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Clarify, explain.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: There is no place here between suspect and suspect, it is
not.
Hon. H.S. Brody: We did not say where or where.
A: But again.
Hon. H.S. Brody: But that's what they're asking.
A: Because of the load I say, it's a matter of the load that was at that moment or
period, it wasn't always managed according to vouchers, if I had the option to
spend then I took out, so in Ofir's case I did take out and in Roy's case I didn't.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now look.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Before, when you asked her and you said, 'So there were no records
inside the house?', she said, 'Sometimes there were, sometimes it didn't depend on
the load and whether I had time at that moment.'
ATTORNEY BARZILAI: That day.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Never mind.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: It's time, but there's a lot of people, full of work, like.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay, can we continue?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Let's ask a question for a moment, luck, let's say it's not an
affair of this magnitude, something smaller, more standard.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: So yes, the registration is ongoing.
Hon. S. Brody: The work procedure in quotation marks or the instructions or how you
or work practice even when it passes inside the house make sure to write down when
there is no special load?
A: So yes, yes. So yes the registrations are conducted, yes transfers are
conducted.
A: The snaps.
Hon. H.S. Brody: I mean, the optimal situation was yes.
A: Yes. I tried as much as possible in this case to manage it in this way as well,
but it was crazy, not even things that always do.
Attorney Barzilai: Madam, I really am.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Which (foreign language).
Attorney Barzilai: It's hard for me, that day, it's every day.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: That day one person.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now look, in your interrogation Attorney Sudri he referred to
the fact that there really is a voucher number here in a traffic ticket and in fact
he tried to understand according to the voucher to which policeman the phone was
transferred from the warehouse are actually shown for extraction or anywhere else
and then you are really interrogated again once you actually brought the voucher
number that you can know for sure to whom the phone physically went. Who did you
hand the phone to, right?
A: According to the voucher number.
Q: That's right.
A: I think who I'm forwarding to, too, yes.
Q: So again, in this particular case of Roy Ashkenazi you can't know because of
clutter, you name it, you can't know.
A: Yes.
Q: Okay, beautiful. I also refer you to your inquiry, inquiry, to your previous
hearing on January 31, 21, at page 5764, line 27.
Hon. Barak Nevo: By her testimony you mean.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: In her testimony.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Here in court.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: In her testimony in court, yes, sorry.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, all right.
Attorney Rosenberg: You mentioned that the registration is actually a material
fact, right? It's not technical.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: It is mandatory to register an exhibit, yes.
Q: That's right, mandatory. All right.
A: Good.
Q: So if we really summarize the traffic report.
A: Whose one?
Q: Roy Ashkenazi's traffic ticket, I'll tell you why I'm puzzled because a few
weeks ago Amir Lavon Superintendent Amir Lavon was questioned here on the stand and
he spoke specifically about this particular phone of Roy Ashkenazi and claimed that
incriminating evidence was extracted from this phone, okay? You don't need to know
about it, but this is the statistic I'm telling you, I can't refer you because
there's no protocol that is being recorded, yet. Now, specifically on this phone,
even though Ofir Michel's phone has and other phones here other people have, even
though you say load, I didn't check them all, but in what I checked there is a
meticulous breakdown of depositing, of registration, of depositing, of issuing an
answer, of starting an exhaustion operation, of termination, everything in detail
on this particular phone.
A: There isn't exactly one here.
Q: So I say.
A: Good.
Q: Do you understand why it's a little weird?
A: Is he a prime suspect in the case?
Q: Yes.
A: They had to take a number of actions and speed things up and not wait for the
voucher to be taken out and brought in, so they took it.
Q: Got it.
A: I don't have any, that's the main thing.
Q: Let's move forward. So we're done with the traffic ticket, you can put that
aside, you can even bring it to me that it won't distract you.
A: Please.
Q: All documents.
A: The table is also displayed?
ATTORNEY ROM: That's mine.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Excuse me.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Can't you have a gift?
ATTORNEY ROM: No.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So I'm going to talk to you about the extraction report.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: About a report?
Q: Extraction report, do you remember that name?
A: No.
Q: No. So I will submit, well, we'll talk before that, Extraction Report Attorney
Sudri also questioned you about this regarding his client regarding Ofir Michel,
you said that you don't remember the name Halitza Report and you do know the
report, I'll give you an example, this is the report, you can be interested in it,
I'll also bring it to court, All right? What is a extraction report, can you
actually explain to me?
A: I'm less involved as a skilled researcher, I'm more engaged.
Attorney Haddad: That's a word coined by Attorney Sudari.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I'm more preoccupied,
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So I said.
A: On the technical stuff, I don't deal with these reports.
Q: All right, now a extraction report, I'll tell you, you don't have to approve or
not.
A: Good.
Q: But it's a report generated using the celebrite software, the report details all
the actions done on the phone, okay? From his birthday in quotation marks, that is,
from the day he opened all actions.
A: Good.
Q: Now, so I guess you also don't know the whole specific action of how the report
is produced and everything?
A: Let's aim for what you want to reach.
Q: No, I'm asking you a direct question.
A: I didn't, I told you I don't deal with these reports, I'm more in the technical
operations.
Q: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: You'll show her, she's not supposed to.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay, I asked, I also asked about the path of negation.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's not her field.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Beautiful. So I would like to submit a rescue report in the
matter of Roy Ashkenazi, which is actually from March 12, 19 to March 19, 19.
Attorney Rosenberg: I have 3 binders here for the court, I also have here the
extraction report, the extraction report and the table that I'm talking about on
the disc, the question if you want me to submit it to you on disk?
ATTORNEY ROM: No, no, sorry.
Attorney Haddad: We will ask but to review.
Attorney Rom: First of all we will ask for a copy, not to peruse, we will ask for a
copy.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So I'll bring you a copy.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, until you bring a copy, I object to the submission.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay, so okay. So I'll talk about it. Was.
Attorney Barzilai: No, second, second, second. Let's hear the resistance and bring
luck again.
Hon. H.S. Brody: What do you need? Bring you a CD that you will copy?
ATTORNEY ROM: No, I say.
Attorney Barzilai: It's theirs, it's their material.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: No, I'll talk about that shortly.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Bring the skilled investigator who carried it out, not me, I
have nothing.
ATTORNEY ROM: First of all, it's about it.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I have nothing to deal with.
Attorney Rom: In the exhibit that the prosecution does not have, let's start with
this, the full copy report of a phone is an exhibit that any suspect may request
from the police because it is actually a copy of his phone, it does not constitute
investigative material in the case and therefore it is not transferred to the
prosecution, it is in principle and therefore the prosecution does not have the
full report of the telephone copy.
Attorney Rom: Neither Roy Ashkenazi's nor any defendant's usually, I don't know
that in this case there is an exception, so as soon as my friend asks to submit an
exhibit, I don't have it.
Attorney Barzilai: You're right.
ATTORNEY ROM: I never saw him.
Hon. H.S. Brody: "I would like to look into it."
ATTORNEY ROM: I would like to check.
Attorney Rom: I would like to receive a copy of it, I want to review it.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Everything is fine.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: This is agreed.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And if there are no reservations, it will be submitted, can it be
marked conditionally?
ATTORNEY ROM: Yes
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Can I mention something? Any document you present to me
regarding the action of a skilled investigator that he carried out, I cannot give
you any evidence about it, you can refer the skilled investigator who will give you
the details, what did he do? How did he do? And what happened?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Don't worry, I won't go through action with you, I'm just.
A: Again, any action related to an action report.
Hon. H.S. Brody: The question is whether this is relevant?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Any action related to an action report that you present me
with a document that I did not issue, not on me, I do not have I cannot give you
anything, no information about it.
Hon. H.S. Brody: I just have a question, do you want within that report to refer it
to a specific action related to the matter of the exhibits?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: For a few actions about, yes, some actions.
Hon. H.S. Brody: We do the following as a procedural agreement we accept the
exhibit conditionally, let's submit it, we will mark and after the prosecutor
checks I assume there will be no problem so if there is a reservation we will
discuss it and if we do not accept it. So if possible, do you want us to mark
something conditional? No, we have nothing to mark because you didn't give us.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Of course, so again.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Do you need all these binders?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I have it on a digital disc, whatever your honor would prefer.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Judge, we need everything, we can make do with digital, can't we?
Attorney Barzilai: Obviously, you don't need the whole binder.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: If necessary.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, wait, wait.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Probably something you want to rely on.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So I'll refer you to specific pages.
Hon. Barak Nevo: But the question is whether you have a photocopy of those pages,
so that we don't have to take all that.
Attorney Rosenberg: I have photographs here that I will refer to examples, and in
the summaries I will turn to other things, obviously me.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So we'll do the next thing, sorry. We will mark and return the
loyalty of the defense, we have no room here for another 3 binders, when you are
investigating right now if you need to investigate Mazal submit the individual
pages we will mark them, if you want later to refer to something else when the time
comes in the summaries then take a photo, maybe you don't need all that.
Attorney Barzilai: You don't have to.
Hon. H.S. Brody: All right? So we said we would mark on probation, if you could
bring, please, then Judge Tamir would mark.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Are the three binders enough?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes. Next shown in running order 157.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: Just a second.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Maybe we will mark only the disc, not the binders, and then the
individual pages that he will give us from this, why do we need all this?
Hon. H.S. Brody: As far as I'm concerned, I said it was returned to him.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, no, I understood, but why should we have a hole of.
Attorney Barzilai: Discs and pages are given.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No bother.
Hon. S. Barak Nevo: Of the exhibits that we are. That the disc will be non-that it
will be returned to them and that the prosecution will be able to check it and the
specific pages will remain marked with us, otherwise we will have a hole.
Hon. H.S. Brody: He said he wanted to refer to more things. All right.
<#4#>
Decision
So we conclude as a procedural agreement thus, the binders in the meantime will
remain with the defense if we need to use accessible, the disc which is actually
the main document will be marked N/157, the printed pages on which Mazal will be
questioned today so we will cut them from N/157 by serial number and in due course
if something more is needed from the binder and in the consent N/157 the disc
passes into the trust of the prosecution for examination and is conditional.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now I'll just add that on the disc itself.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So that's the decision.
Attorney Rosenberg: The disk itself also has an auxiliary table because of the
complexity of the table, which is exactly similar.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That you prepared?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That we prepared that again it is as an auxiliary table in the
matter of Adv. Sudri that was filed as N/126 the table in his case, a pretty
similar table that I also request.
Hon. H.S. Brody: It's the same idea.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Excuse me?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, the same idea.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes. And I'll pass on to my songs as well.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Is the table inside the disc?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes, too.
Hon. H.S. Brody: It doesn't need to be marked. So okay, we're done with the markup
thing. Now you want to refer to the specific documents.
O.K.D. Rosenberg: Yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now, lucky, we talked about the traffic report that as far as
I'm concerned, we didn't understand exactly where the phone was at that particular
moment, but I'm leaving that aside. Now, there is a extraction report here that it
details all the operations performed on the technical phone the physical operations
performed on the phone, changing files, deleting data, all the actions, I will give
you a reference, sorry, this is the report, this is the auxiliary report, this is
the auxiliary report and I will refer to the example. It actually divides
operations into 3 groups, the first group was actually in time until the
registration operation, OK? The person who wrote down we said it was Chen Kogman on
March 12, if you go through the traffic ticket, you'll have to believe me right
now, you can go through here too.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That's the reference chart now what you presented to her? Excuse
me.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Her auxiliary chart, yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Is that what you did?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes, we edited it by dates, you can see that really from March
12 that it's an action.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Maybe we'll get it soon.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: So maybe we will approach, we will submit the table.
Hon. H.S. Brody: We'll mark it shortly. Very well.
<#5#>
Decision
It will be marked N/157A. An auxiliary chart that we said was conditional, is

submitted conditionally.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
ATTORNEY ROENBERG: Wait, don't you have a copy?

Hon. H.S. Tamir: We don't have one at the moment. We don't have the disc either.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes. In fact, let's go over the auxiliary table.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: At the end of the day, it affects the report, we can see that
in the first period actually.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So we said the first period until the registration operation. What
is the question?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That in fact this is all the actions that took place on March
12, we see that 67 actions took place, you're following me, Lucky?
Hon. H.S. Brody: It's a look.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: You can according to the serial number. Ok. Beautiful. Now,
it's an ass.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: 70 actions.
Q: That's right, 70 actions.
A: Yes.
Q: No, you know what I'll be more precise, just Chen Kogman mentioned in the
exhibit drawing that it was at eight o'clock 24, okay?
Hon. Barak Nevo: 20:24?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: 20:24 And so I calculated it up to action 67, but really
that's not the point.
Q: Action 1, 2. Now, 70 actions.
The Honourable Barak Nevo: On March 12 until 20:24.
Attorney Rosenberg: That's right, it was, the device was under the responsibility
of Chen Kogman. Now, from the time of actual registration until the deposit of the
item, that is, by March 13 at 10:56 a.m., 50 actions have been performed.
Hon. Barak Nevo: At what time?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: 10:56 a.m.
Hon. H.S. Brody: 50 actions?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes, 50 actions.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Okay, yes, do you see that, Lucky, in the auxiliary report?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Beautiful. Now, from depositing the item in the warehouse that
I see according to the traffic report from March 13.
A: There is also in 12.3 his listing.
Attorney Barzilai: No.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: No? I'd love for you to show it to me in front of my eyes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Her name? There? It's with you.
A: No, you're talking about the lines within the item chain.
Q: The traffic ticket?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay?
A: Yes.
Q: Beautiful. And what interests me is actually from the day the item was deposited
in the warehouse, as we saw on March 13.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: But earlier you spoke to me about the 12th, on March 12.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: So we made progress.
A: Good.
Q: Now we're from the 13th.
Hon. Barak Nevo: He says this, on March 12 until 8:24 P.M., when Chen Kogman
recorded the addition of the item, until that moment there were 67 actions, from
the moment of registration until the next action that we see in the report, which
is on March 13 at 10:56 A.M., which is depositing the item into the warehouse, he
says there are 50 actions.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And luck corrected she said 70 in the first category.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No.
ATTORNEY ROM: Because there wasn't that exhibit before her.
Hon. S. Barak Nevo: He corrected.
ATTORNEY ROM: No.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Wait, he fixed 70 is this day, but by 20:24 when it was deposited,
it was only 67.
Hon. Barak Nevo: There were 3 actions after this hour.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: That's right, and it's not important right now.
Hon. Barak Nevo: All right, we just wanted to clarify what the 67th and 70th are.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: A point of action.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now why isn't that important, Lucky? Because basically from
the day the item is deposited.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Until today?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: No, from the day the item was deposited.
Hon. H.S. Brody: From the date of depositing the item it was March 13
Hon. H.S. Brody: Until today?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: He's actually under your responsibility, Lucky.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Witness?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Up to and including.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Up to and including.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: And until the end of the report, actually, it's until March
19.
Adv. Rosenberg: Thousands of operations were performed on the device. You can pass.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: There's also Maxim's action report that it's before, if
I'm not mistaken, then it's not until the 19th, I told you again.
ATTORNEY ROM: But he didn't ask a question.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I asked.
ATTORNEY ROM: What's the question?
Hon. Barak Nevo: How do you explain it?
ATTORNEY ROM: No, I want to know what the question is for the witness?
(Talking together).
Hon. Barak Nevo: The question is how do you explain it?
ATTORNEY ROM: Maybe I can object to the question.
Hon. Barak Nevo: The question is, how do you explain it?
(Speaking in the background).
Attorney Rom: Beautiful.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Enough, enough, enough, you can shorten it, he wants to understand
how she explains it?
ATTORNEY ROM: So I object.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Enough, well.
Attorney Rom: The witness is not a skilled investigator, she has no expertise in
mobile phones, she does not have to explain about actions carried out inside a
phone seized by the police.
Hon. Barak Nevo: He did not seek to explain the content of the actions, he sought
to explain the very actions.
Attorney Rom: Also the very actions.
Hon. Barak Nevo: But she already answered and she answered, she said, 'It was at
Maxim's, what do you want from me?'
ATTORNEY ROM: No, but.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Like, enough.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay, but it's not, he kept asking her after all, it's not, what is
it?
Attorney Barzilai: No question will be asked.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She manages.
Adv. Barzilai: About a skilled computer researcher.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I ask a few questions.
Attorney Rom: This whole document is related to a skilled document.
Attorney Barzilai: It doesn't matter, but the whole investigation is based on her
guard if she was.
(Talking together).
Hon. Barak Nevo: So she explained, it fits with what she said earlier.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: The management of the warehouse was customary, okay? I told
you again, there are the investigators, there are the main suspects.
Attorney Barzilai: Lucky, we have no claim to you.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Okay, so that's it. Unrelated.
Attorney Barzilai: To others, yes, we want to show that, that's all. It's just a
hair in a glass of water, everything is fine.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Look, Lucky, I'm not asking you any specific questions about
you either, you don't know about the actions performed on the phone itself, you're
not a skilled computer researcher, are you?
Q: I ask you, I also didn't ask you about actions that took place that weren't
actually under your shifts, I have the only thing I have right now is the traffic
report, in the last traffic report that appears as the person who deposited the
exhibit to the exhibits warehouse is you and so I'm asking you about actions that
happened on the phone how did they happen in the end?
A: I can't answer you about actions done on my phone because I didn't perform
actions on my phone.
Q: That's right.
A: I can tell you physically about the device itself.
Q: But you were responsible for it, so I'm asking you a few questions.
A: I was not responsible for checking the exhibit and the content within it, I am
responsible for the exhibit warehouse for the exhibitor's physical stay where it
will be.
Q: So I'll go over some data with you, some actions performed that the phone
according to the traffic ticket was in your custody.
ATTORNEY ROM: So I object.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: But again I answer you about it.
Hon. Barak Nevo: But she answered that.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: My colleague should ask Maxim these questions.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Excuse me for a moment, stop, stop. She said that the whole time
the phone was exhausting evidence it was under her responsibility because it was
inside the house and she was responsible for all this, but she didn't do any
actions on the phone, as far as she was concerned this time was indeed under her
umbrella, but not when she was dealing with the phone and she didn't know how to
explain specific actions, she said 'the phone was with Maxim who is a skilled
computer researcher', It's an answer to all the questions you're going to ask.
Attorney Barzilai: That's not an answer to anything.
Hon. Barak Nevo: So say in the summaries, 'This is not an answer to anything.'
ATTORNEY ROM: So ask Maxim.
Attorney Barzilai: Shiri, I don't need advice.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: But I can't answer you about actions that a skilled
interrogator has taken.
Attorney Rosenberg: So I want to address a few points and I will not extend only
examples and in the summaries I will turn to the essential things. Page 20324 of
the extraction report.
Hon. H.S. Brody: 20, excuse me?
Adv. Rosenberg: 20324.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Are you presenting this page?
Attorney Rom: What are you referring to?
Attorney Rosenberg: I referred to the report to page 20324.
Hon. H.S. Brody: That would be, Judge, N/157B?
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Yes.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Now, I refer you, you don't have to read everything, I refer
you to action 50, again it's all examples because there were thousands of actions
here. Line 50 on the same page can be seen.
ATTORNEY ROM: Page 20 on the disc is 700-something.
ATTORNEY ROSSENBERG: What?
Attorney Rom: On the disc on page 20 I see 740.
Adv. Barzilai: Shiri, 324, line 50.
Attorney Rom: So what is page 20?
Adv. Barzilai: Page 20000, Shiri.
Attorney Rom: 20324.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Because it's sorted by dates. All right? Do you see on page
50?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Line 50, yes.
Q: Excuse me, line 50. I'm telling you that you can see that the device's antivirus
was activated here, okay? Now, on March 12th at two and three minutes, you can see
there that an action has been performed, you see, some action has been created in
the software and on March 17th is the last line that action has been deleted, can
you tell me what those actions are?
A: You can contact the trained researcher.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She really is not the address for these things. Yes please.
Hon. Barak Nevo: If there are any other questions.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: I have a few more examples.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, so there's no point, there's no point, she told you, she
doesn't know how to explain anything that happened on the phone at that time he
was.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: All the answers will call for a skilled investigator.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Although it is its responsibility, but not its custody and
actions.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: Also 52, also 53 probably the same answer.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Yes. There are thousands of actions here, again I won't ask
you this, just confirm to me that all the actions I see here in this report of
deleting, changing, adding things that were done Don't you know what happened with
the phone in that period of time?
Q: Okay.
A.T/9 Maj. Mazal Yochai, responds in cross-examination to attorney Yaron Barzilai:

Attorney Barzilai: Lucky.
Q: I, with your permission, will ask you 2 questions and we'll finish the matter.
Listen, things are clear to you, no one pretends to interrogate you about an
investigation by a skilled investigator, not you, not me, put that aside. On March
17, in the case of Ofir Michel, Sudari's client, whose senior prosecution method is
higher than Roy Ashkenazi, you did what you had to do, the device came out, you
issued a voucher, that's the directive, right? That when a device comes out, there
is no load now no load, a voucher has to come out at the exit and there has to be a
voucher at the entrance, right? Simple and easy.
A: That's when there's no congestion.
Q: This is when there is no congestion. Now, I tell you that from an examination
that I conducted, and I say this with caution, there are no examples like Roy
Ashkenazi that there are tests by skilled investigators that the phone goes out,
returns, when there is no indication when it came out, when it returned, the fact
that in the case of Ofir Michel and other suspects in the same matter there are
vouchers.
A: You're showing a specific example here.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, but it's not, sorry, no, no.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Let's go through all 1,000 exhibits and take out all the
vouchers.
Attorney Barzilai: Listen.
A: No, I don't have anything else.
Q: I want to, no, but I want to.
A: You want factual is factual.
Q: Lucky, I want to understand something and this matter is important, not just my
friend is opposed.
A: It's also not Roy's show, you're talking about Michelle language it's Roy.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, he's trying to tell you.
Hon. H.S. Brody: He compares the two.
Hon. S. Barak Nevo: At Michelle's.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Okay, that's an example, so I said there's no where and
where, I said again, a load of suspects, a load of exhibits.
Hon. Barak Nevo: The one you said is true.
A: So I don't have any, you want let's take out all the outputs of all the exhibits
and see how things went.
Attorney Barzilai: Luck, luck, there's a bit of confusion here at this point, okay?
The burden is not on me, the burden is on them, you don't matter, you can say it
500 times.
Q: I'm telling you that there is a procedure, I'm telling you that you did the
procedure, I'm telling you that the procedure was done against a suspect who, as
far as the state is concerned, the offenses he committed were more serious than Roy
Ashkenazi's, and there was still the vouchers as the procedure says, and with Roy
according to you, because of overload, even though it was exactly the same day as
Ofir Michel.
A: I said at the beginning that there is no place between suspect and suspect, I am
not coming.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, the question is, what are you transmitting to her? Okay, she
explained.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I'll tell you the truth, I don't even know what's going on
inside the file, I don't care.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She explained why.
A. I don't even know if it's the most main, what happened to it? Either was with
him or Michelle, it doesn't interest me at all.
ATTORNEY BARZILAI: I'm finishing, ma'am. I don't think, I don't think there's where
and where, certainly not that you did where and where.
Hon. H.S. Brody: But what is the question of luck in this matter? Because she came
and said, 'It's a matter of congestion, I didn't choose,' that's her answer.
Attorney Barzilai: Okay.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Moreover, she said, 'I also didn't know who was more senior and
who was less senior.'
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, she didn't know anything, she doesn't intervene.
Hon. Barak Nevo: "I don't even know what the roles are."
Attorney Barzilai: Ms. Mazal can come and say whatever she wants, I don't have to
accept what she says.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, but what do you want to say?
ATTORNEY BARZILAI: And the question. Not. My question is, do you have an
explanation and so I end by showing you, maybe I didn't explain it well enough,
that on that very day, March 17, at an hour close to each other, in one case you do
spend properly and as you did in almost all cases and in one case you don't, if you
have an explanation? Load? Load.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Thank you very much. Anything else? Anyone else? Thank you.
ATTORNEY ROM: Re-investigation.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Can I get 157A? Table.
Hon. H.S. Brody: All right. You've got it, right?
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Can we re-interrogate?
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Please.
A.T/9 Maj. Mazal Yochai, responds in a re-interrogation to attorney Shiri Rom:

ATTORNEY ROM: Yes, so I'll investigate and then, my colleague in the meantime goes
through the disc and we'll give our position for submission. So now so things.
First of all, when registration is made, as you say, when an exhibit is registered
and a virtual deposit is made to the warehouse, you say a sticker comes out.
Q: Who takes out the stickers?
A: I am.
Q: Only you?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. What's going on with this patch? What do you do with her physically?
A: It is physically pasted on the envelope in which the exhibit was caught.
Q: Okay. And what happens to what's on in that envelope?
A: You basically went into the warehouse.
Q: Okay, but if it doesn't go into the warehouse, if it's going to, say, ZIT then
how is it received? I mean, what's going on with the envelope and sticker?
A: Assigned to a skilled researcher.
Q: No, and what happens in terms of the exhibit?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Is the exhibit transferred inside the envelope?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Sure.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay.
Hon. H.S. Brody: So explain, that's what you ask, the questions are simple.
Attorney Rom: I mean that you said that you sometimes gave ZIT a box of exhibits of
the same suspect.
Q: Where are the stickers for all the exhibits?
A: It is produced automatically and then I go to the exhibit and paste it
physically.
Q: No, when it comes to the ZIT investigator, where are the stickers? Comes, he
gets a box, where?
A: Again.
Hon. Barak Nevo: There are 3 phones in the crate.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: He's in a crate.
The Honorable Barak Nevo: 2 nylons. No, it is not.
A: Maybe, no, a second.
Hon. Barak Nevo: 2 nylons and I don't know where the sticker is?
A: On the exhibit, on the shell of the exhibit.
Hon. Barak Nevo: All right, let you explain.
ATTORNEY ROM: Now look.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, just a second. It is quite simply, there is an exhibit,
which is displayed inside an envelope and on top of it there is the sticker.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Is that how it goes to ZIT? Entity.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Can you see what is being shown?
A: Yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: And there are also exhibits that are not in an envelope and on
which they themselves have a sticker.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay. Now I show you again what my colleague presented to you is the
report.
Hon. H.S. Brody: You mean size, yes.
Attorney Rom: Maxim's report.
Hon. H.S. Brody: If you do, let's say the exhibit is large.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I don't hear.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Let's say there are exhibits that are larger, so what do you make
of nylon that? What are you pasting on?
A: A large envelope, sometimes it's a computer sticker can also be physically on
the computer.
A: Try not to, less.
A: Damage the exhibit itself.
Attorney Rom: I'm showing you the barcode 2857 This is Maxim's report which is
actually of checking the exhibit this item of Roy Ashkenazi of copying the item, of
this phone and another phone of Roy Ashkenazi, he actually produces these 2 items a
day on March 17th He writes, now, how does he know in the report to write that he
made a copy of phone Item number 817 All this number, How does he know how to
write the number of the item he produced?
The witness, Maj. Yochai: According to the sticker.
Q: Okay. I mean when Maxim gets the box with these 2 items he checked he gets them
with stickers, is that right, an obvious conclusion from these things?
Hon. Barak Nevo: She said earlier.
ATTORNEY ROM: Yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: She said it before.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay. All right. We actually have more evidence that he receives an
item with a sticker, meaning that from the moment the exhibitor leaves an epic hall
he is festively dressed in a sticker with an ID number called that of the
exhibitor.
Q: Okay, now, I want to show you the voucher of item number 8966 This is the second
item Maxim checks that same day another phone of Roy Ashkenazi.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, what is that day?
ATTORNEY ROM: On March 17.
ATTORNEY ROM: In this output, what happened? What is written?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: On 12.3 Chen Kogman writes down the number item, on 13.3 I
supposedly produce a sticker on the exhibit, on 17.3 Maxim attaches the exhibit to
it.
Q: Beautiful.
A: There is a first and end of an exhibit check.
Q. When you say 'Maxim pins him' what does that mean? What does he do? Like how he
is.
A: There is a system of exhibits of miraculous extraction where the exhibit is
attached to the same skilled researcher, you know who is handling it, the beginning
of the examination begins and when he finishes it.
Q: Okay. And who records that it appears so miraculously?
A: If a charming feeding policeman appeared then Maxim pinned it to him.
Q: So Maxim himself took notes.
A: Pin it to him.
Q: Miraculously.
A: Yes.
Q: Miraculously, I mean he recorded on the computer that he checked the exhibit on
March 17.
A: That's right.
Q: What he didn't do about the previous exhibit.
A: Right, right.
Q: Right? Do you know why he didn't do that?
A: No.
Q: Okay. Now.
A: I appreciate because of clutter.
Q: Okay.
Attorney Barzilai: Luckily, I'm silent because I respect both of you, it's not a
question you ask.
ATTORNEY ROM: All right. So now I would like to submit this voucher of the exhibit,
Roy Ashkenazi's second cell phone, which was registered by Maxim 8966. Objection?
Yes, subject to his testimony of course also his report I will ask to submit
subject to his testimony, it is a double report also copying, also copying and
also.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: The 2 documents or?
Attorney Rom: It's actually 3 documents, one is the voucher.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Do you submit it in several copies?
ATTORNEY ROM: I had 3 copies, one I gave to my friends.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay, never mind. Okay, we'll manage.
ATTORNEY ROM: That's the voucher.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Where is the voucher?
ATTORNEY ROM: Here's another copy, ma'am.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Thank you very much. What kind of drum is that, Judge Tamir?
Hon. Hashem Tamir: Wait, is this the last drum in the series? Or maybe.
Attorney Rom: We just just sent a list of exhibits already of the next witness Ran,
so we arrived.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Can this be marked by agreement together with the defense
exhibits? Or does it bother you?
ATTORNEY ROM: You can.
Attorney Barzilai: Yes.
ATTORNEY ROM: Yes.
Hon. S. Brody: Why should we later look for every single fish in this ocean?
ATTORNEY ROM: You can.
Hon. H.S. Brody: There is procedural agreement here, it is submitted in re-
investigation, but from a practical point of view it is related to the other
documents.
Attorney Barzilai: Maybe we'll say just for convenience.
Hon. H.S. Brody: For convenience only and our offer. Yes. You said there was a
sticker.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, so I referred here to the line on March 17.
Hon. H.S. Brody: A voucher, what is a voucher? This?
ATTORNEY ROM: No. It output movements.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, you said that one is the voucher that you are submitting.
ATTORNEY ROM: Accidentally. It doesn't break.
ATTORNEY ROM: What is it called? Item chain? Item chain output.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, all right, she said 3 documents. Yes.
<#6#>
Decision
Presentation of item data 81278966 it would be N/157C, this as stated was submitted
by the accuser as part of the re-investigation.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Hon. H.S. Brody: And here we see, just the court's note: we see that here Maxim
Yudkiewicz notes in the rubric of the item chain reflects the examination of the
exhibit.
Attorney Rom: And the 2 reports of Maxim's inspection of copying the item.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Which has to do with the bone.
ATTORNEY ROM: That's the 2 items, yes.
<#7#>
Decision
Maxim's reports are actually also earlier we referred, the report dated 18 March
2019 will be N/157C also this is under re-investigation and it is actually
submitted by the accuser.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Hon. H.S. Brody: You have one more report by Maxim.

ATTORNEY ROM: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Here, too.
Hon. Barak Nevo: You said earlier that it was a phone he checked on March 17th.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes. Here it says in the March 18 report it says on the date.
Hon. Barak Nevo: He checked it on the 17th.
Hon. H.S. Brody: On March 17.
ATTORNEY ROM: That's right.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And then we have another document here.
<#8#>
Decision
Report of the operation of penetration of computer material Examination of a mobile

phone dated 18.3.19 and it will be N/157D.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Hon. H.S. Brody: Anything else?

ATTORNEY ROM: Why does this report say copying, but the report doesn't contain
Maxim's what I just submitted?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: My previous copy disappeared.
Q: Are there 2 copies here?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, we'll repeat the exhibits.
<#9#>
Decision
Presentation of item data We said this N/157C and Maxim's action report dated
18.3.19 is C-58 N/157D and report
Infiltration operation 18.3.19 N/157E.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Hon. Barak Nevo: You said the Lord earlier.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, no, all right we arranged.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Was twice a D.
Hon. H.S. Brody: We arranged. That's why I came back.
Attorney Rom: Can you momentarily submit the report I just submitted? Maxim's, yes.
I can't find his copy for some reason. Got it?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Second, there should be his report on 81278966 these are both
about me, Maxim's report about this.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay, I found, I found it.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay. Here he writes about the 2 phones.
Attorney Rom: Maxim's copy report states that "I received an item number" He writes
the number of the item in question from Roy Ashkenazi and he writes "which is
affixed to my name in the police wonder system", what does that mean?
The witness, Maj. Yochai: The same line of diary that is written pinned to the
detective.
Q: Yes, but in 8921 we don't have the journal line, here we don't have the line.
A: It's an action report, it's a generic action report that they're always working
on and it's one of the lines that appears regularly, again, on an ongoing basis,
not in this specific file that are not always presented. I, as the ZIT coordinator,
attach the exhibit to the same skilled researcher, in this case each researcher
received a box with the exhibits and was supposed to attach it to it.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Pin it to what?
The witness, Maj. Yochai: The same exhibit that he handles.
ATTORNEY ROM: Like he did with the phone.
Hon. Barak Nevo: You mean by registration he had to make a record that he attaches
it to?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Yes, I usually do it because I started out in 2 roles.
A: So they were supposed to.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, because when you say "attach" we don't know if you mean
physically or if you mean that in the registration it is registered as attached?
A: In this sketch as well, the same interrogator is attached to him, and I also
physically bring him the exhibit.
Hon. H.S. Brody: They receive the box and the researcher has to make sure that the
object of the exhibit is attached to it.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: In this case specifically, I do it, yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: In this case, we're talking about.
A: Basically, yes, yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: In general, you do it.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: But in this case they got the box.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: The same group of researchers received a box.
A: Yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: And the researcher who handles a particular exhibit has to reflect
that in the records that it is attached to.
A: Yes, there will be a follow-up of what happens with each exhibit.
Hon. H.S. Brody: To attach to it every exhibit.
Hon. Barak Nevo: To register the linkage she calls it.
Hon. H.S. Brody: To write, yes, right.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay. Now I want to present you with another report, this is a report
written by Greco Gilbert on April 5, 2019, a report about another test he performed
on the same phone of Roy Ashkenazi 8921 at the end.
Q: Do you see the report?
A: Yes.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Did you say 5.4?
Attorney Barzilai: Yes, that's what you said.
ATTORNEY ROM: It's barcode 2863.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, I asked a date.
ATTORNEY ROM: 5.4, yes.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, which exhibit is 5.4?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Which phone did he check again?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: 8921 at the end.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay. Now I'm asking you about this report, wait, he writes here, "On
April 5, 19, on the instructions of the investigative team, I carried out another
examination of the examination carried out by investigator Maxim Yudkiewicz on
March 18, the item" So and so, how does he know that Maxim Yudkiewicz examined this
item?
A: According to his action report.
Q: Okay. How does he know it's the same item again?
Attorney Barzilai: Shiri, I am silent and silent and silent, how does she know how
he knows? Answered. Not a good answer for you, it's true.
ATTORNEY ROM: No.
Attorney Barzilai: But she can't testify.
ATTORNEY ROM: My friends are completely not on the same line with me.
Attorney Barzilai: You're really not on the same line with me.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Is it possible to know, how can we know from this report that it
is the same phone? That's what she wanted to know.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: So I'll answer, ask Gilbert Greco how he knows.
Hon. Barak Nevo: No, what.
Attorney Bar-Oz: Good answer.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, no.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: But there is.
Attorney Barzilai: What is 'no, no'?
(Talking together).
ATTORNEY ROM: No, that wasn't the question.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Don't shout.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: We haven't read, but come on, anyone can rely on Maxim's
action report from March 18.
Attorney Barzilai: That's right. But that's not what she wants to hear.
ATTORNEY ROM: No, that's not what I asked, that's not what I meant to ask.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: That's what I see in the context.
Attorney Barzilai: That's not what you intended to hear.
Attorney Rom: I see that Gilbert writes here as well.
Recorder: Second, you can't transcribe it.
Attorney Rom: Gilbert writes here the item number the same item number 8921 How
does he know how to write the item number?
Attorney Barzilai: I oppose the question, I oppose the question, there is a limit,
I oppose.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Because it's not necessary, it's not needed either.
Attorney Barzilai: That's right.
Hon. Barak Nevo: It's perfectly clear, he knows it because the item number is
written and it's the same item number.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay.
Hon. Barak Nevo: That's clear.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay, so if it's clear, fine.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Lucky just doesn't understand the objections.
ATTORNEY ROM: The problem here.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Exactly.
Attorney Barzilai: Does she understand the facts?
Hon. Barak Nevo: She doesn't understand the problem because as far as she's
concerned, it's transparent and it's clear.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: No problem.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay. I mean, on April 5, basically this phone according to this
report.
A: Yes.
Q: Where is this Gilbert report?
A: At Gilbert's.
Q: Which is where? Who is Gilbert? And where is it?
A: He's a Ramach.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Physically does she mean physically in which?
Witness, Maj. Yochai: If he records that he performed an examination of the device,
then the device is physically in his possession.
Attorney Rom: With him where?
Hon. Barak Nevo: Where is it with him?
ATTORNEY ROM: Where in the world? In his house?
Hon. Barak Nevo: No.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: In exhaustion.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Okay, 'and the extraction is with me,' it's clear she already
said.
ATTORNEY ROM: Okay.
Hon. Barak Nevo: She doesn't understand what we want from her.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: I really don't know what's going on.
Hon. Barak Nevo: The thing is that they are trying to say that the registration is
inaccurate as far as you are concerned, this whole thing is under the same ceiling,
things are clear because there are item numbers, he knows what it is because he
writes down the item number, things are clear, you don't have to ask her, we
already understood all the contexts, thank you.
ATTORNEY ROM: So I'm just.
Hon. Barak Nevo: They will consider whether it's okay or wrong, you'll say it's
okay because you see it there and luckily she doesn't have any.
Hon. Barak Nevo: A need to go into these things.
Attorney Barzilai: I just want to say in honor of Mazal.
Recorder: You're without a microphone.
ATTORNEY ROM: I just want to submit this Gilbert report.
<#10#>
Decision
Gilbert's report dated 5.4.219 was filed and marked N/157F.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Hon. H.S. Brody: And, all right, and that's the report.
Attorney Barzilai: It's important for me to say.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Wait, just a second, did Attorney Rom finish the re-interrogation?
ATTORNEY ROM: Yes.

Attorney Barzilai: It's important for me just to say.
Hon. H.S. Brody: With court permission, yes.
Attorney Barzilai: When we say 'I don't understand,' God forbid, we have a legal
argument, this case if it wasn't a phone file you wouldn't have come here either, I
have no problem with your registration, our problem is that because of the lack of
the required registration, in our opinion, it is impossible to make an accurate
diagnosis of actions that were done on the phone during a period that is not,
second, that no actions were supposed to be done on it, and therefore the entire
investigation and all the arguments between us are related to actions that were
done on the phone, Not in your keeping.
Hon. Barak Nevo: She understood.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: That's what a skilled investigator is for.
Attorney Barzilai: It was important for me to tell you this.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: Who writes the action report.
Attorney Barzilai: That's all.
The witness, Maj. Yochai: Everyone and his role.
Hon. Barak Nevo: What you had to explain and did explain is that as far as you're
concerned, the whole time it's with a skilled investigator it's like at home, so
because of the rush, sometimes it doesn't register, usually it does get recorded,
and as far as you're concerned, there's no problem with it because there's
surveillance all the time and when it's with the skilled investigator, as far as
you're concerned, it's in the same place it needs to be and there's surveillance on
it.
Attorney Haddad: I want to object to the submission of the CD, I have reviewed in
the meantime and it is a document that has over 30,000 pages, but the defense
presented us here and submitted only 1,000 pages to the court and they are not
sequential either, that is, one from here, one from here, one from here, it is
impossible to check in this way.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Then the full document must be submitted.
Adv. Haddad: The full document.
ATTORNEY BARZILAI: Sure.
Attorney Haddad: Therefore, we will ask the defense for the full document.
ATTORNEY HADAD: And then we will be tested.
Hon. H.S. Brody: I don't think they object. The defense will do what needs to be
done.
Attorney Haddad: Agreed?
Attorney Haddad: Shall we accept?
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Again, because, this report. Yoni, listen to me too, because
it's important.
Attorney Haddad: I'm listening.
ATTORNEY ROSSENBERG: This report was also with Attorney Sudry, he gave you what was
relevant to the specific dates, which I referred to as what I conveyed.
Attorney Haddad: I asked for a sudri lawyer.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Second, second.
Attorney Haddad: Second, I'll clarify, I'm from Attorney Sudri and I asked to get
the full document as well and he said, 'No problem, take it,' we agreed that I
would take it from the police, I took it from the police regarding Attorney Sudari.
ATTORNEY RONZENBERG: Okay, so take it.
Attorney Haddad: So come.
Attorney Barzilai: What was done with Sudri is the same.
Attorney Haddad: So just ask me when you got us to know who to ask for.
Attorney Rosenberg: We will conduct an examination and update.
Attorney Haddad: I think it's simplest for you to give me, but if you want me to
take from the police, I'll take from the police.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, it doesn't need to, just a second. Protocol.
(Talking together).
Wait, sorry, the protocol is being recorded and there is no need for all this
dialogue to go into the recorded protocol. At the moment, counsel for the parties
will find a way for the prosecutor to review the document whether the defense
passes or it applies so that he can get it by the same method as he would receive
from attorney Sudari, but this needs to be done and does not need to be followed by
the record.
ATTORNEY HADAD: No, I said.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Can we let go of luck?
Attorney Haddad: Lucky can be released.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Thank you very much.
Witness, Maj. Yochai: Thank you.
Attorney Haddad: I tell the court, it is important to me that it be on the record.
Attorney Haddad: Even though it was agreed here in the courtroom that we would get
it from the police, afterwards both Attorney Bar Oz and Attorney Sudri argued here:
'Why did you suddenly take this thing from the police?'
Hon. H.S. Brody: So you ask that it be explicitly approved.
Attorney Haddad: That's why I want it to be, for it to be approved and agreed on
the record.
Attorney Barzilai: Did I complain to this day?
ATTORNEY HADAD: What?
Attorney Barzilai: Did I come to you with any claim to this day?
Hon. H.S. Brody: No, but he's right.
Attorney Haddad: I am preempting a remedy for the blow.
Hon. H.S. Brody: She doesn't answer my mail, Ricky.
Hon. Hashem Tamir: You don't need a typist.
Hon. H.S. Brody: No? You don't have to.
Hon. Barak Nevo: Shouldn't we?
Hon. H.S. Brody: Just a second. Gentlemen, we are still here by chance.
Hon. H.S. Tamir: Just a second record.
Recorder: I'm on recording.
Hon. H.S. Brody: Thank you.
<#11#>
Decision
The discussion of the recording is over. The next evidentiary hearing will be held
on January 17, 23 at 8:45 a.m. Recording services will be invited. It was explained
to the defendants present in the courtroom that they were obligated to appear for
the hearing.
Leora Brody, Judge

Lieutenant, Avd
Hon. H.S. Brody: We are closing the yeshiva and Shabbat Shalom.
-Recording ended-
Recorded by Rebecca Binyamin
7653
8375

05a3fe3944764f4a0300000094b92aa3.docx

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

05a3fe3944764f4a0300000094b92aa3.docx

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You

Center-Lod District Court

Defendant 1 – Missing with court permission

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

It will be marked N/157A. An auxiliary chart that we said was conditional, is

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

ATTORNEY ROENBERG: Wait, don't you have a copy?

A.T/9 Maj. Mazal Yochai, responds in cross-examination to attorney Yaron Barzilai:

A.T/9 Maj. Mazal Yochai, responds in a re-interrogation to attorney Shiri Rom:

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Hon. H.S. Brody: You have one more report by Maxim.

Report of the operation of penetration of computer material Examination of a mobile

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Hon. H.S. Brody: Anything else?

Infiltration operation 18.3.19 N/157E.

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Gilbert's report dated 5.4.219 was filed and marked N/157F.

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Hon. H.S. Brody: Yes, please.

Leora Brody, Judge

Michal Barak-Nevo, Judge

Michael Tamir, Judge

Recorded by Rebecca Binyamin

You might also like