Honenu Atty. Adi Keidar; Photo credit: Honenu
Monday, January 10, 2022, 20:02 On Monday, January 10, the Supreme Court accepted an appeal by a Shomron resident who was convicted of throwing a stun grenade at an Arab town and reduced his 20-month prison sentence by eight months. Honenu Attorney Adi Keidar filed the appeal on behalf of the appellant, a minor, who was convicted of an incident that occurred in the Arab town of Sarta in the Shomron region approximately one year ago. According to the bill of indictment, a stun grenade was thrown into the town and rocks were thrown at several houses and cars.
Supreme Court Justices Noam Solberg, George Karra and David Mintz ruled that the decision by Central District Court Judge Haggai Tarsi to reject the plea bargain presented by the minor with the Attorney General’s office was erroneous. The Supreme Court set the penalty according to the plea bargain. In their decision the justices wrote: “In taking heed of the entirety of the considerations at the basis of the plea bargain, in consideration of all of them, we have decided as desired by both the appellant and by the attorney of respondent 1, to acquiesce to the appeal in this sense: We have decided that the length of the prison term that the appellant will serve will be that which was set in the plea bargain, that is to say, 12 months’ imprisonment.”
The minor is serving his prison term in the isolation wing of the Ayalon Prison under extremely severe conditions in light of his classification as a Jewish security prisoner. The Prison Service prohibits him from having telephone contact with his family, and he spends approximately 22 hours a day in his cell alone. His family is allowed to visit him, behind a glass barrier, once every two weeks for only half an hour.
Honenu Attorney Adi Keidar: “Today, the Supreme Court accepted the appeal that we filed on behalf of the minor after the Central District Court rejected the plea bargain agreed upon by the two sides. We are pleased with the results. It is unfortunate that we had to reach the Supreme Court. There was no need for the Central District Court to interfere with the plea bargain. We also do not agree with the approach of being stringent with ideologically motivated crimes. A penalty should be determined on the basis of all of the evidence and all of the assessments existing in criminal law. The minor is expected to complete his prison sentence in the coming days and to return to his normal life.”