Deputy Superintendent Koresh Barnor, head of the investigation team in Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s 1000 and 2000 cases, testified today (Tuesday) for the second time in the Jerusalem District Court. Netanyahu’s defense attorney, Amit Haddad, focused on the negotiations Barnor conducted with Ari Haro, the chief of staff in the Prime Minister’s Office who signed the state witness agreement, and claimed that the police pressured Haro to provide incriminating information in general, and not about specific offenses. After Barner avoided answering the questions, Judge Moshe Bar Am told the police that the conduct of the police was far-reaching.
Haddad sought to substantiate his claims that the investigators went on a “fishing expedition” for the evidence against Netanyahu, and referred to the intelligence information that the police had regarding cases that were being investigated at the time, such as the Bibitors case and the employment of the consultant Odalia Carmon. In the investigation conducted for Hero in July 2016, Bernor said that “we know that there was criminal involvement”, and reminded him that an investigation was underway against him in another case. “A case is pending against you, and we are going to negotiate to give up and for you to give real things,” Bernor said at the time. Haddad asked the former head of the investigation team several times what involvement in crimes was attributed to Hero, and Bernor replied that he meant the case of H3 Global, a consulting company that he owned and whose sale was found to be fictitious. Haro was convicted in the case as part of a plea deal and last January he was sentenced to six months of community service and ordered to pay a fine of NIS 700,000.
closure
Sub-Superintendent Koresh Barnor and defense attorney Amit Hadad in court, today. Haddad asked if the protocol would confirm that Hero could have been threatened with other investigations, and Brenor replied in the negative Photo: Naama Greenbaum
Sub-Superintendent Koresh Barnor and defense attorney Amit Hadad in court, today. Haddad asked if the protocol would confirm that Hero could have been threatened with other investigations, and Brenor replied in the negative Photo: Naama Greenbaum
Related articles
“There is a person against whom a serious case is pending,” Barnor told Hadad. “There are substances that in my eyes are seen as serious. The guy wanted relief, so I have to fulfill my professional duty and ‘clean him up’ to see that he is not holding in his hand a substance that incriminates him and others,” Barnor explained.
The judges had a hard time accepting his answer. Judge Bar-Am asked Bernor if the use of the phrase “involvement in crimes” was not an investigative exercise designed to create a false representation, and was not said on the basis of relevant information. Bernor evaded and replied that “the framework you are striving for is to see whether to recommend moving forward with him on the basis of his reliability. I base this on his involvement in crimes, also on things that are revealed to me in the intelligence reports, including Odalia Carmon.”
Hadad presented additional statements by Bernor in which he asked Mahru to provide information about Netanyahu’s environment. “What can you tell me about criminal incidents or wrongdoings against others in the last 10 years?” the investigator asked Haro in the 2017 investigation. “What is needed from you is an agreement. You tell me what the illegal things are so that I know what goods you have. I give you something heavy, I close the case for you. I want to know what you are giving.”
closure
Ari Haro testifies in the Netanyahu trial, last year. “The guy wanted relief, it’s a give and take equation,” Barnor explained about the state witness agreement Photo: Emil Salman
Ari Haro testifies in the Netanyahu trial, last year. “The guy wanted relief, it’s a give and take equation,” Barnor explained about the state witness agreement Photo: Emil Salman
Defense attorney Hadad asked Baranor to understand if he received the attorney general’s permission to ask general questions about criminal or illegal acts related to the prime minister in the past decade. “He approved for me to enter into the outline of a state witness agreement with him,” replied the head of the investigation team, and Judge Rebecca Friedman-Feldman asked to clarify and asked if he agreed to request a list of events. “When you enter into the outline of a state witness agreement,” Barnor explained, “it’s a simple equation of give and take. The intention is to make a list, a kind of cleanliness testimony. I need to hear from him and be impressed by him that he does not store or hold material against others. This is the essence of witness agreements country,” he said. Friedman-Feldman continued to pressure Bernor to be precise, and Hadad asked explicitly: “If I see a protocol, I will see that the ombudsman allows you to take Ari Haro, to threaten him in his personal file so that he will admit the prime minister’s wrongdoings?” Bernor replied in the negative
After continuing the defense line with the help of Bernor’s additional requests for information about Netanyahu’s environment, Hadad presented a section of the investigation of Gil Shafer, the chief of staff who preceded Hero and was suspected of sexual harassment. In the investigation, similar things were said on the part of Deputy Superintendent Momi Meshulam, who asked to receive all the information he had even though he was not intended to be a state witness. The judges asked Bernor repeatedly about the line of inquiry that did not focus on particular suspicions, but on general questions. “The investigators’ impression was that the subject did not reveal the whole truth, so the investigators asked him to elaborate,” said Barnor. Judge Bar Am reacted sharply and said that “intelligence materials is not a magic word. If you ask to tell about anything wrong, it goes too far, and when it is asked in relation to a prime minister, then at all.”
