S.D., the secret state witness in the Holyland real estate trial against former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Tuesday, brought new faces into the trial arena, telling the court he gave money to Maran HaGaon HaRav Ovadia Yosef Shlita via Shas mosdos.
Interestingly, in Monday’s testimony, 23 Elul, the witness admitted lying earlier, referring to himself as an “idiot”, placing doubt on the integrity of his words. SD claims to have passed 350,000 NIS in bribe money to Rav Ovadia in 2000. Funds were used to finance the defense counsel in the criminal trial of the former Shas leader, Rabbi Aryeh Deri. He told the court the funds for Deri’s defense were given to Yair Peretz.
He details that he gave Deri 300,000 or 350,000 NIS, admitting he was not certain, and when he questioned Deri as to why he was never thanked for his assistance, it became clear to him that Peretz had kept the money, stealing it for himself. He admitted to the court that Deri had told him that he never received money from Peretz.
The sum of 600,000 or 700,000 NIS was allegedly given to other Shas affiliated mosdos, including to the rav personally and his tzedaka fund.
Getting back to the testimony on Monday, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman released a statement on Tuesday (24 Elul) referring to SD’s testimony. SD stated [on Monday] that when Lieberman served as the director-general of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s office in 1994, he told him that “Olmert is corrupt”. Lieberman denies ever making such a statement. Liberman added “I was not even serving as the prime minister’s bureau chief in 1994. I entered that post in 1996”. Lieberman added that he never met with SD during his tenure as bureau chief. He told of one instance, while passing through a hotel lobby, explaining a third party introduced him to SD and that was it.
(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
3 Responses
What a strange “democracy” and “justice” system Israel has that it allows secret witnesses in an ordinary criminal trial. It is generally accepted that under a democracy with a free and independent judicial system, an accused has the right to defend himself. That this right is absolute and of greater importance than the obligation of the State to prosecute him. However, can someone really defend himself against secrets; secret witnesses, secret evidence? So where is this “the only democracy in the Middle East?” Seems to me that what we have here should be called DeMockracy instead.
Aryeh Zelasko
Beit Shemesh
the key witness sounds a bit foggy in this article.
“secret witnesses”????????
I know the Israelis prefer European over American styles of jurisprudence, but do they have to look for the 1930s models to base their system on?