parents of Ahuvya Sandak
parents of Ahuvya Sandak Honenu

The parents of Ahuvya Sandak held a press conference Sunday following the closing of the case against the police officers involved in the death of their son.

The parents said in a statement: "We feel our hearts have been stabbed again. If Ahuvya's was killed by a blow, then here is a sword of untruth which pierced his soul. We cry out to the earth not only for his blood but for justice. Our demand is for justice. Why do we not have an elementary right to have our case brought to court? A scandal has been made in Israel."

Avraham Sandak, Ahuvya's father, added: "We, the parents of Ahuvya are fighting for the blood of all the children of Israel. We will do everything we can so that our son will be the last to be killed by police violence and wanton hatred. Our demand is a fair trial."

At the beginning of the statement, the family's lawyer said: "We came here today due to a combination of two circumstances. One is the Attorney General's letter, in which he announced his decision to close the case against the police. The other, and more important, reason is a letter that reached us, a dramatic letter that tells us what happened behind the scenes in the Department of Internal Police Investigations."

"They argued for a year against the DIP chief's involvement in prosecuting the officers. It was claimed that it had allowed the investigation to be disrupted by the police officers involved in Ahuvya's death. Now, from an internal letter we received, we received the evidence we needed all along," he added.

"The investigation was not carried out because it was not clear that a collision was caused, but in the end we know that DIP was aware that the police officers had hit the vehicle. "Later, the investigators who were appointed to investigate the affair began to understand that the police were doing everything possible not to provide an accounting of what happened.

"Later, they were ready for the investigation, and at that stage it is clear to the professional level in the DIP that there was an attempt here to disrupt the investigation. The head of the investigation team prepared to interrogate them, but late at night, the head of the DIP intervened and made an unusual order. She told them to release the police. They went home for three days, and we have no doubt that they coordinated evidence. It was then too late," he continued.

He added that "another and no less disturbing point is what is not in the attorney general's letter. The policemen stood 15 meters from Ahuvya and did not come to help him. The attorney general knows that in law there are offenses of manslaughter, and he did not do the minimum examination. He goes home and leaves us feeling extremely distraught. It is clear to us what the acronyms of DIP are today in his eyes. Department of Covering for Police Officers. It is a pity that this is the message he is sending to the people when he goes home."

Advocate Menashe Yado of the Honenu legal organization said: “A child was killed in a police chase, and nothing happened. Everything is fine. The attorney general rejected the version that [the vehicle was] hit, saying the accident occurred during a reasonable attempt to overtake [the suspects' vehicle]. There is no indictment because the police officer's decision to overtake was reasonable."

"And I say - and anyone can understand - that the decision is unreasonable. The vehicles drove at tremendous speed, the boys 'vehicle overturned twice in the air after the blow, on a narrow, winding and very bumpy road, all the way the boys' vehicle swerved left and right and did not let the vehicle overtake them. Under these conditions, the policeman attempts to overtake them, which did not last even a fraction of a second. As he pulls stops the overtake, the car's underbody hit Subaru and Sandak died. Is this a reasonable decision? Can anyone accept that?"

"This decision is decidedly unreasonable. Sandak was killed," Yado accused. "The attorney general cannot say 'reasonable' and qualify the death. The public will judge and the matter will go to the Supreme Court," he concluded.