Ben Uliel's lawyer: 'Many contradictions in case prove his innocence'

Summary hearing at trial of main defendant in Duma case held in Central District Court. Former MK Moshe Feiglin was present at hearing.

Mordechai Sones ,

Israeli court
Israeli court

The summary hearing at the trial of Amiram Ben Uliel, the main defendant in the Duma case, was held earlier this week in Central District Court in Lod.

During the hearing, both the prosecutor and Ben-Uliel's lawyers presented their positions.

Ben Uliel's lawyer, Asher Ohayon, made numerous arguments before the court challenging the claim of Ben Uliel's confession, which he recalled was extracted under torture during his GSS interrogation.

"We relied in our petition on a great deal of documents and evidence so that from every angle we reviewed his confession there were many very significant flaws," Ohayon argued.

"First of all is the testimony of the person who was there and actually saw two people throwing firebombs at the house and they are the ones who actually committed the act., while the prosecution also claims that Amiram could not be one of these two. In the end we presented the question to the court: If the evidence is true, then it is necessarily not Amiram. For us, this is a key argument in the testimony that proves Amiram's innocence," said Attorney Ohayon.

"In addition, many more arguments were presented, one of which was that there were two different graffiti samples in the place and neither of them is in Amiram's handwriting. Further proof that there were two arsonists and neither of them is Amiram because it's not his handwriting. Two different and very fresh shoe prints were found in the area. Neither of them were identified as Amiram's."

In conclusion, Attorney Ohayon called on the judges to acquit Amiram. "By law, in order to acquit a person, the court needs reasonable doubt. With all the contradictions we presented there's much more than reasonable doubt. We sincerely hope the court transcends all the winds blowing outside the courtroom and examines the matters in depth and in judicial independence and decide according to the law. By law, there's far beyond reasonable doubt."

Former MK Moshe Feiglin was present at the hearing, and said that after it became clear that Ben Uliel's confession had been extracted under torture, it "wasn't worth a garlic peel," as he put it.

"Recall that torture was intended for use against a ticking bomb. Here, on the one hand, they took this measure but turned it against Amiram and presented his confession at the court as if it were a regular confession. In addition, the defense witnesses laid out a great deal of contradictions in all the prosecution's statements. All we have left is to pray that the accused be released and justice be done," Feiglin said.