Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Remand Extension, Incriminators

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Email
Roni Hammermann, Tova Szeintoch (reporting)

Translation: Tirza Sandbank


Judge:  Lieut. Col. Menahem Lieberman

Police investigator: Shanan Muhammad

Defense: Firas Sabah,  Judd Kadmani,  Muhammed Zahalka


There are three cases in the docket.  Two of the detaineesinfo-icon are barred from meeting with attorney.

The Gag Order concerning these cases was removed yesterday (see report from 13.7.15).

As a result the case was reported by the media.


The defense attorney, Judd Kadmani, pointed out that the information that the police investigatorwas prepared to reveal was much more reduced compared to the information known to the media.  He claimed that it was of the utmost importance that the defense be in possession of this information. 

The investigator replied this wasn’t his responsibility.


Faiz Abed al-Maj Jaber Hamed - I.D. 90144770

Defense: Firas Sabah

The police investigator requests an additional 4 days for the investigation.

The detainee is suspected of actions endangering security in the region.

Both sides agree.



Amjar Abed El-Karim Muhammad Dar Adwan – I.D. 850979527  

Barred from meeting with attorney.

Defense: Judd Kadmani

Police investigator requests 12 additional days.  This is connected to a plan for a complex and detailed investigation.

There is need for additional days in order to complete the investigation at this stage.


Q:  The Defense requests to be informed whether the name of the detainee is among those mentioned by the press.

R.: If that is what you heard, so be it.

Q.: What are the suspicions?

R.: Actions against security in the region,  military action,  affiliation with intent of  criminal action, criminal action.

Q:  Did the detainee make the connection? 

R.: Yes.

Q. When did he make the connection?

R.  During the first interrogation, 12.7.15

Q.: Was this based on incriminations?

R.: There were various developments and we received two more police statements.

Q.: Was there a significant development?

R: Yes.


Summary of the Defense:  We oppose the request.  The detainee has admitted the suspicions against him. The detainee, claims the defense, has given police statements.  He claims to understand that there are claims of dangerousness, but it is still possible to transfer the case to prosecution.

Kadmani requests to shorten the requested period for investigation.


Jamal Jameel Salim Yunis – I.D. 948623038

Defense: Muhammed Zahlaka


The police investigator requests an additional 15 days of detention.

The detainee has been in custody since 9.7.15.  This is the second has  remand extension.

He gave a police statement and connected himself to the suspicions. He adds: "For the time being much remains in the dark, and we still have a lot of work in front of us."


Q: Is is true that the detainee came to the investigation to which he was summoned of his own accord?  R: Yes.

Q: Is the detainee cooperating with the investigation?  R: He gave evidence which, according to the people involved in the investigation, is only partial.

Q: Do I understand correctly, that he is one of the group detained in connection with the murder of the deceased Rosenfeld?

R: I cannot answer that question.

Q: I read in the newspaper that the detainees admit everything.  If so, why not transfer the case to the prosecution?

R:  I am referring to the material concerning the investigation.

Q: Would you please confirm that all members of this group are detained.

R: There are additional people involved.

Q: Does he admit that he is connected to the crime?

R: He admits connection to the suspicions levelled against him.


Summary of the defense:  Requests to shorten the additional period for investigation.  The detainee is 62 years old, suffering from a heart disease.  He came of his own accord and is cooperating fully in the investigation.  He did not know about the attack.


The judge extends remand in custody for an additional eight days.


In both cases where the detainees were barred from contact with an attorney, we were not present at the examination of the detainees and were present only at the hearing where the defense appeared.