Ofer - Release on Bail, Stone Throwing

Translation: Marganit W.

Judge: Major Sharon Kenan

Prosecutor: Lieutenant Slava Pasek

Defense: Atty. Novani

Defendant: Muid Abed Alaziz, ID 949591648 - Case 3019/13

A typical surreal hearing.

It is a case of rock throwing that took place a year ago in Mazraa Al Sharkiya near Ramallah. About two months after the incident, the army caught an incriminator who provided them with a “grocery list,” namely, a long list of names that led, among others, to Muid’s arrest 17 days ago.

Muid denies the allegations and his attorney requests an alternative to detention.

In his decision, the judge accepts the defense’ argument that there is a big gap between the two interrogations that the incriminator underwent. The judge himself described the interrogation of 4.6.13 as dubious, since the incriminator did not even mention the defendant in his detailed account of his activities in the last couple of years.

As for the interrogation on 18.6.13, the judge points out that despite the details the interrogation does not mention the defendant either. The judge adds, “This indicates that the actions mentioned in the indictment are unusual, if they are to be believed at all.” The judge accepts the defense’s argument that most of the people detained as a result of that list have already been released. He adds that the defendant has no prior convictions and no record.

However, he does have a month old baby waiting for him at home.

In view of the above, the judge orders an alternative to detention under the following conditions: 5000 shekel bail plus 5000 shekel third party guarantee in case of failure to report to court.

Defendant: Hader Ibrahim Mahmoud Issa, ID 858060982 - Case 2822/13

Defense: Ahmed Abu Safiya

The charge sheet includes rock throwing, illegal stay in Israel and car theft.

The defense claims that the defendant already served time for the prior convictions and asks the court to focus on the car theft, and to regard the charge as a property violation.

The defendant is a young man who tried to steal a car from the settlement of Ephrat.

This is an attempted theft: the vehicle was located a few meters away, in the owner’s yard; it was unlocked and the keys were inside.

Unanswered is the question why Issa broke the immobilizer cords.

At this point the prosecutor announces, “A DNA test was carried out on the cords!”

The judge asks: How did you accomplish that? When I sit on a rape case in Tel- Aviv, it takes a month or two to get DNA results.” He wants to know if the results are in. Of course they are not.

In his decision the judge accepts the defense’ argument that this is a case of alleged attempted theft since the vehicle was so close by.

As for the other charge, illegal stay inside Israel, it is to be ignored since it is a corollary of the theft allegation. The defense is correct in arguing that detention is unwarranted in a property violation. Despite the prosecutor’s official request, not every property violation justifies detention.

Thus, the judge orders an alternative to detention under the following conditions: 6000 shekel deposit and third party warranty of 5000 shekels.

Atty. Nubani was also the defense in the hearing of Bassel Abu Nasser from Qalandiya refugee camp.

Bassel is 18.5 years old and has been in detention since 25.7.13.

When he was 16 he was convicted for using explosives (Molotov Cocktail). He was in jail for 11 months and was released as part of the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange.

This time he was arrested at home, charged with throwing rocks.

Bassel’s father has been in jail at Ketziot for 12 years as part of a 15-year sentence.

The next hearing is set for 9.9.13.

Atty.Akram Samara will be the defense.

One of the more interesting aspects of the courts is the language it uses. A defendant who rejects the allegations is defined as someone “who does not accept responsibility”. This time we heard another gem: It is a case of a man who drove a vehicle with fake license plates, with no license and no insurance. When chased by police, the young man got panicky, abandoned the vehicle and tried to flee the scene.

In his summation, in one of the clauses, the judge described the flight as a display of “contempt for the law.”