Sunday, August 21, 2022, 18:59 Last week, police detectives detained Elisha Yered on suspicion of breaking into a private Palestinian compound in the area of Ma'aleh Amos in Gush Etzion. The Jerusalem Magistrates Court ordered Yered held in remand until this morning (Sunday) and then extended his remand for another three days. Honenu Attorney Moshe Poleski, who is representing Yered, appealed the decision to the Jerusalem District Court.
Also today, a hearing was held at the Jerusalem District Court during which Poleski stated that Yered and friends who were with him thought that the compound was an abandoned storehouse and therefore they entered it when they were hiking in the area. However, when they realized that it was a private place they immediately left. Judge Ilan Sela overturned the Jerusalem Magistrates Court decision and ordered Yered released to several days of house arrest.
In his decision, Judge Sela wrote that he is not convinced that there is reasonable suspicion of a racist motive. Also, it was a property violation that with all its severity, was a minor incident. Judge Sela further stated that in reverse situations of Palestinians breaking into Jewish homes, the motive has never been claimed to be racist. No evidence was brought before him by the police indicating a nationalistic motive, and at the scene, no graffiti or intentional property damage was found. Additionally, Judge Sela ruled that in light of the fact that Yered has already been held in remand for six days, he will not pose a danger if he is released to house arrest. Therefore, Judge Sela ordered his release to house arrest under restrictive conditions until Thursday.
Honenu Attorney Moshe Poleski stated in response to the court decision, "The court confirmed everything that we had claimed from the start, and that is that it was a minor property violation that was not even grounds for detention. The court accepted all of our claims, including those regarding posing a danger to the public. Judge Sela also cited the discrimination toward the appellant. This is exactly what we claimed from the start, that there was no indication of a racist motive and that such a motive was automatically attributed to him only because he is Jewish."