Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Barred (from meeting with attorney), Release on Bail

Observers: 
Roni Hammermann, Tova Szeintuch (reporting)
30/05/2016
|
Morning

Translation: Marganit W.

 

Judge: Lieut. Col. Menahem Lieberman

Police Investigator: Ziad Katish

Defense: Ibrahim Ayad, Judd Kadamani

 

9 cases in the docket, 5 of them are barred from seeing counsel.

 

Muhammad Daoud Shehadeh Ayad – ID 942742636

Defense: Atty. Ibrahim Ayad

 

The police request a 4-day remand extension to complete the investigation.

The defense objects: Not even one day!

The detainee asks to address the court. He speaks good Hebrew and is an imposing man.

He tells the court that he has been detained since Tuesday but has not been interrogated at all. ”I am treated like a dog. I am a 64-year old man. I have worked in Israel for 40 years. I gave the police everything they wanted: my car, my computer, my phone. I don’t know anything. I have no idea what goes on in my son’s head.”

[It is not clear from the examination who is asking and who is responding]

 

Q: Confirm that the respondent’s son (Daoud) has been detained.

A: Yes, he is in detention.

Q: On the day of arrest, the detainee was confronted with his son and asked him to cooperate.

In lieu of answer Justice Lieberman asks the investigator to explain why the planned interrogations had not been carried out. The investigator gives lengthy explanations, adding that this is not the only detainee. There is a lot of work.

Q: The defense wants to know what is the specific charge against his client. You know that two decisions had been given in this case. Have you seen them?

A: Yes.

Q: Both decisions order you to complete the investigation. Today you are asking for an extension for the same investigation.

A: The case is linked to another case.

Q: Your investigation plan requires detention?

A: Yes.

 

Defense’s summation:

Two decisions have already ordered the police to conclude the investigation, and yet there are no satisfactory answers. Why does the detainee have to come to court every day, especially since he has no prior record. There is no justification for detention. It is time to release him.

 

Judge’s decision:

The police requests 4-day extension to complete the investigation. The investigator presented a report on 4 actions the police plan to take and has given explanations why this has not been done yet. I do not find these explanations satisfactory. There is some suspicion that warrantees detention due the severity of the terrorist act allegedly committed by his son. However, the investigation should be conducted with efficiency and consideration for each detainee, even when there are links to another case.

Since I do not find justification for detention and there is no risk factor, I reject the police’s request. To insure that the respondent will report to court if required, I order him to deposit a 10,000-shekel bond. If he is not called for further interrogation within 45 days, the money will be returned.

The police can appeal the decision within 24 hours.