Adir Habani Admits in Court That Past Sexual Incident With Ex-Partner Was Rape
Adir Habani admitted in court that a past sexual incident with ex-partner Ola Kravchenko was rape. The testimony came during a defamation trial in Tel Aviv.
For years, Adir Habani has been primarily associated with the version of events he provided against his former partner, Ola Kravchenko, in the Tair Radah murder case. On Tuesday at the Tel Aviv District Court, one of the central cross-examinations took place in a three-million-shekel lawsuit filed by Kravchenko against Habani, the creators of the documentary series "Shadow of Truth," and attorney Yoram Halevi, alleging publications that defamed her and implicated her in the murder.
During the cross-examination, Habani was also questioned about his conduct toward her during their relationship and regarding a sexual incident where, according to details presented in the hearing, Kravchenko cried, asked him to stop, and tried to break away. Habani stated that, in hindsight, he understood it was rape.
Confessions and admissions in court
The unusual moment in the hearing arrived when attorney Amir Titonovitz, representing Kravchenko, confronted Habani with things she had written to him in the past and claims she had made against him. When asked directly about the incident, Habani replied: "I did not deny it. Even the act of violence between us was consensual. Regarding this, I say in hindsight I understand it was rape. I also say this in the media."
Later, the questioning became even more direct. Titonovitz asked Habani if he accepts criminal responsibility for that act. Habani answered: "Yes, if I need to take responsibility and serve time in prison for it." The judge intervened and clarified that Habani was stating he accepts responsibility for what he did, and Habani added that if required to bear the consequences, he would do so.
However, this was not his only statement on the matter. The judge herself asked why, out of a relationship that Habani described as involving violent sexual relations and power games, he defines this specific event in hindsight as rape. His response was: "Because only in this case did she cry and say 'I didn't want this'."
Titonovitz continued by asking what happened immediately after the incident. Habani recounted that after seeing Kravchenko crying, he sat down next to her and apologized.
"For raping her?" asked attorney Titonovitz.
"Correct," Habani replied.
"You understood that you raped her?"
"Correct."
This takes on additional meaning in light of a previous interview of Habani presented during the hearing. In that interview, he said: "It is not defined by law as rape, but instinctively I cannot say that I did not rape her." When asked today how he explains the assertion that the matter is not defined by law as rape, while according to his own words he is completely unfamiliar with the law, he replied: "Right now it does seem to me something defined as rape. I don't know the law, I didn't consult with any lawyer."
The question facing law enforcement
And here a question arises that cannot remain confined within the courtroom walls. During the hearing, statements were presented showing that Kravchenko had previously accused Habani of raping her, including during a police confrontation conducted between them. The open question is what law enforcement authorities did with the information revealed to them.
Was Kravchenko's claim of a non-consensual sexual act investigated independently? Was her testimony taken on the matter? Was Habani investigated under caution on suspicion of a sex crime? And if a dedicated investigation was not opened following these statements, why not? The statements made by Habani himself in court make these questions even more significant.
The cross-examination did not stop at that incident. Attorney Titonovitz also confronted Habani with Kravchenko's claim that during their relationship he slammed her head against a wall. When asked why he did not deny this in their correspondence, Habani simply replied: "Because it is something that happened." In additional material presented at the hearing, Habani attempted to qualify the statements, claiming the event did not happen precisely as Kravchenko described. When asked again, "Did you smash her head against the wall or not?" he replied: "Yes."
Motives and the aftermath of the breakup
Yet the central purpose of the interrogation was broader. Kravchenko's attorneys sought to paint a picture for the court of a turbulent relationship and a bitter breakup, presenting an opposing thesis to Habani's version: according to the plaintiff's claim, his severe accusations against Kravchenko did not stem from objective information free of interests, but rather from an intense connection, post-breakup anger, and a desire to remain present in her life.
Within this framework, text messages exchanged between the two after the breakup were presented to Habani. He confirmed that he published the correspondence on Telegram and that in some messages he hurled curses at Kravchenko. When asked if he called her names and used offensive terms, he replied that "there are messages of this sort and others." In additional material presented in court, he confirmed that he cursed her, but tried to minimize the significance.
Titonovitz argued that while Habani wrote to Kravchenko in a harsh and offensive style, she tried repeatedly to appease him. Habani rejected this portrayal, claiming the correspondence actually reveals her "manipulative sides" and that there were instances when she responded to him harshly.
Another main line of questioning dealt with Habani's conduct after the breakup and the fact that Kravchenko was in contact with other men. Her attorney suggested that the breakup, and the realization that she had moved on, deeply hurt him and led him, according to the prosecution, to want to punish her through the murder accusation.
Habani rejected the claim that it was a fabrication, but did not hide the intensity of the pain he experienced. "The breakup was very painful, I felt like a discarded sock," he said. When asked if he was then in a state of "madness" or emotional turmoil, he initially replied that it was turmoil and later added: "Madness might be correct to say about this breakup, a kind of madness."
Titonovitz attempted to connect these matters to Habani's behavior surrounding Kravchenko's desire to leave Israel and move in with her sister in the United States. He asked Habani if it was true that he did not want her to leave the country as long as there was no one else to protect her. Habani replied: "True," but claimed this stemmed from his belief that she was dangerous rather than a desire to control her.
When asked whether, had he not accused Kravchenko of murder, he might never have seen her again and she would have moved to the United States, Habani answered: "It's possible." He denied that this was the reason for his decision to approach the police.
The attorney repeatedly returned to the confrontation conducted between the two during the police investigation into the murder case. According to him, Kravchenko accused Habani repeatedly of lying, of trying to "frame" her for murder, and of inventing the story. Titonovitz argued that Habani did not bother to deny some of the accusations she hurled at him. Habani rejected the interpretation, saying he continued to accuse her because he still believes his version is correct.
The cross-examination also touched upon Habani's mental health history. Titonovitz confronted him with matters raised in Roman Zadorov's retrial, indicating he was previously diagnosed with a behavioral disorder featuring narcissistic traits. Habani confirmed this was a diagnosis from his distant past, but rejected the attempt to infer that he uses lies or that this explains his conduct in the affair.
Even when asked if he feels the need to apologize today to Kravchenko for his behavior toward her, his answers were complex. Initially, he said he was not sure, and later stated he would be glad to apologize to her. However, when asked what exactly he is apologizing for, Habani reverted to the murder case, claiming his apology is specifically for not going to the police earlier and sharing his version.
Thus, the hearing in the lawsuit filed by Kravchenko against Habani and other defendants has expanded far beyond the question of who said what in the Tair Radah affair. On one hand, Habani continues to stand by his severe version against his former partner. On the other hand, under cross-examination, he confirmed acts of violence, described the breakup as a period of turmoil and even "a kind of madness," and most importantly, stated in his own voice that in hindsight he understood a sexual incident between them was rape and that he is ready to bear responsibility for it.
Now, the court is left with two entirely contradictory versions regarding Habani's motives: he claims he acted because he believed Ola Kravchenko was involved in the murder and that she posed a danger. Ola Kravchenko, through the cross-examination, seeks to prove a different story: a former partner deeply hurt by the breakup, unable to accept her departure from his life, who turned the murder accusation into a tool to maintain a presence in her life. Habani's cross-examination has not yet concluded and is expected to continue next week at the Tel Aviv District Court.
