Judges Intervene as Investigator Claims Amnesia in Case 4000 Testimony
During the Case 4000 trial, Jerusalem District Court judges intervened as a police investigator repeatedly claimed memory lapses when questioned about humiliating interrogation tactics used against Shaul Elovitch.
A tense confrontation unfolded Wednesday at the Jerusalem District Court during the testimony of police investigator Oded Shta regarding the interrogation methods used against Shaul Elovitch in Case 4000. Defense attorney Jacques Chen presented video footage from the interrogation rooms, asking the witness to explain the methods applied to the businessman, including remarks about Elovitch potentially working as a supermarket security guard after losing his fortune. Shta repeatedly responded that he could not recall the events, prompting the judges to intervene and direct the defense to move forward.
The core of the hearing centered on February 2018 interrogation sessions where investigators made explicit remarks regarding Elovitch's property, arrest, family, and financial future. Chen argued that investigators intentionally humiliated the suspect by demonstrating how he would stand at a store entrance with a magnetometer, asking customers to open their bags. Shta stated he did not recall the specific circumstances, though he acknowledged a general discussion took place, adding that he had no intention to humiliate anyone and that things are sometimes said in jest during intense interrogations.
As the questioning continued with similar blank responses, presiding Judge Rivka Friedman-Feldman intervened, stating there was no point in spending the whole day listening to memory lapses. Judge Moshe Bar-Am also questioned the rationale behind the magnetometer remarks, to which Shta replied he could not recall the logic at the time. When Chen accused the witness of lying and defending improper interrogation methods, Shta firmly rejected the claims, maintaining that he operated strictly according to the law and established procedures under audio and video surveillance.
Despite the judges' impatience and instructions to advance, Chen insisted that the investigator's failure to explain the humiliating tactics remains vital for demonstrating systematic pressure. Judge Oded Shaham concluded that since the original video and audio documentation is already fully available to the bench, the ultimate evidentiary weight rests on the recorded evidence itself rather than the witness's delayed recollections on the stand.
