A hit-and-run case that took place in 2006 was back in the courts on Monday as the Supreme Court deliberated an appeal from state prosecutors. The appeal was filed after the original, controversial ruling given in the case made headlines nationwide when the judge involved, Moshe Drori, was considered for a seat on the Supreme Court.
After Drori was named a candidate, his detractors used the case in question, in which a yeshiva student received a light sentence after deliberately running down a female parking lot guard, to question Drori's abilities. Drori was also accused of racism against the victim, an immigrant from Ethiopia.
Drori said his relatively lenient verdict was based in part on the fact that the victim said in court that she forgave the offender, following a public apology. Since the victim accepted the apology, there was no need to charge the driver with “moral turpitude,” Drori ruled.
Drori's detractors have accused the district judge of letting the driver off without a “moral turpitude” charge following pressure from the man's family. The driver hopes to become a religious court judge, and would be unable to do so if he bore a charge of “moral turpitude” on his record.
'He Never Really Apologized'
On Monday, the victim in the hit-and-run incident said she regretted having forgiven her attacker. “His apology wasn't genuine,” she said. “That hurts me most, that he never really apologized... I forgave him despite everything, but now I understand that I didn't have to.”
The victim said she had suffered for two and a half years following the attack, which left her with head injuries.
During the hearing the victim broke down in tears, leading Justice Edmund Levy to comfort her, saying, “You aren't guilty of anything in this incident, you do not need to apologize. We want you to share your feelings.”
Levy criticized Drori's verdict in the case. “I read the District Court's verdict and I did not understand how the yeshiva student was not convicted,” he said.
'I Sinned Against You'
The accused told the Supreme Court that he had been serious when he apologized to the woman during his earlier trial, and offered an additional apology. “I'll say again – I sinned against you,” he told her. “If you want, I'll do whatever I can to make it up to you.”
The man's attorney, Boaz Kenig, argued that Drori had been correct in allowing the driver to escape without a “moral turpitude” charge or prison time. The driver had experienced the death of his young son shortly before the incident, throwing him into emotional turmoil, Kenig said. Following the attack the man was deeply sorry, and willingly apologized to his victim and performed community service, he said.