Search
  • dwaldman33

Detainee had summoned help


Honenu Attorney Adi Keidar; Photo credit: Honenu


Monday, April 5, 2021, 8:05 On Saturday, April 3, a Binyamin region resident witnessed a disturbance, which included a clash between Arabs and Jews, outside of the village of Jalud near Shilo and then drove to a nearby guard post to summon the assistance of IDF soldiers. To his surprise, when the police arrived at the site, they decided to detain him. The following day (Sunday), during a Jerusalem Magistrates Court deliberation on the extension of his remand Honenu Attorneys Nati Rom and Adi Keidar stated that the charges against him were illogical: The physical build and the clothing of the detainee do not match the people seen in a video clip of the incident. Also, the detainee is charged with all of the violations committed during the incident, despite there being at least two or three perpetrators visible in the video clip. The attorneys further mentioned that the police did not bring the testimonies of the soldiers whom the detainee had summoned. In conclusion, the Jerusalem Magistrates Court decided that although it is not possible to know whether the detainee is one of the assailants, they would agree to the police request to extend his remand. Honenu appealed the decision and Rom pleaded that “the court erred in accepting the request (to extend the remand), first and foremost because it ruled that there is a reasonable suspicion, despite their ruling that the according to the evidence presented to them, it is not possible to know whether the appellant is one of the assailants.” Rom noted that the court was presented with a video clip in which the clothing and physical build of the assailants does not match that of the detainee, and that he gave testimony – that he drove to summon help from the closest army base – which corresponds to a photograph shown to the court. The appeal concludes, “in any event there cannot be a dispute that the reasonable suspicion of committing the violations written in the request is unlikely,” and that according to the police they have only two significant investigative actions to carry out, which do not justify a prolonged remand extension. Honenu Attorney Nati Rom: “My client did not commit the violations attributed to him, but rather went to the closest army base and requested help from the soldiers. He should not have been detained. This is an example of over-motivation [on the part of security forces] which we hope will be diverted to the rioters who set Jewish fields on fire, and vandalized IDF guard posts, security cameras and a gate close to the scene [of the disturbance which the detainee witnessed]. Honenu Attorney Adi Keidar: “The court’s decision is difficult to understand. The court was presented with a video clip which proves the innocence of the appellant. Therefore, with the lack of other evidence, it is not clear on what the court relied when deciding to extend the appellant’s remand. We hope that the [Jerusalem] District Court will order his release today.”

0 views0 comments