Witnesses corroborate detainee’s alibi

Wednesday, June 7, 2017, 17:19 On the afternoon of Wednesday, June 7, the Jerusalem Magistrate Court ordered the release of a Jewish man in his early 20’s who was detained the previous day on suspicion of involvement with an assault which occurred near Givat HaBaladim approximately six weeks ago. During his interrogation the detainee stated that he had not been at the site at the time of the incident and gave an alibi. Several witnesses came to the police station, testified that the detainee had been with them at the time of the incident, and corroborated the detainee’s alibi.
In light of the testimonies, the police requested the detainee’s release the following morning at the police station on condition of posting a 2,000 NIS bond. Following the detainee’s refusal to post such a large sum he was brought to the Jerusalem Magistrate Court for a deliberation the following morning. Judge Miriam (Mika) Banki ordered him to be released on his own recognizance and under the conditions of a third party bond and posting a 1,000 NIS bond. Honenu Attorney Adi Kedar represented the detainee.
The court also ordered the release to several days of house arrest of an additional suspect in the same case who had been detained a few days previously. Honenu Attorney Yossi Nadav represented the detainee.
Honenu Attorney Adi Kedar: “My client was erroneously detained and explained to the police where he had been at the time of the incident. Several witnesses came to the station and supported his alibi. The Israeli Police are quick to detain citizens on the basis of prior acquaintance and not on the basis of evidence and connection to the incident. It is a shame that the investigating authorities do not carry out professional interrogations but rather, ‘shoot in all directions’, even when citizens are deprived of their freedom and their rights are systematically violated. We intend to insist on penalization to the full extent of the law in this false detention case.”
Honenu Attorney Yossi Nadav: “My client was detained over an assault which occurred approximately six weeks ago, and despite the period of time which has elapsed, the police are still waving around the claim that he poses a danger. Moreover, there is a substantial doubt that my client is the man to whom the police attribute the serious violations. The release of my client indicates that he is not the one who carried out the act attributed to him. I have no doubt that the police detained the wrong man.”