The regional Jerusalem court is at a crossroads. The Prosecutor's request to reformulate the case against Netanyahu is his big test whether he is truly interested in seeking the truth or will he buckle under the dictation of the prosecution to receive Netanyahu's head at any cost?
Shlomo Filber, witness for the prosecution, was supposed to be the central witness in Case 4000. The most significant event which Filber testified to dealt with the "briefing session" which he had with Netanyahu where the latter directed him to operate in the framework of his position as CEO of the Communications Ministry in a way that would benefit the accused, Elowitz.
The prosecution's letter states: "Shortly after Filber's appointment, the accused, Netanyahu, summoned Filber to his office and directed him to help Elowitz. This meeting did not have even a smattering of the extensive investigations regarding the stock market, and even when he was questioned later on Lahav 433, Filber made no mention of the meeting.
Only after threats and pressure, when he understood that if he wished to be acquitted from the charges against him, he would have to serve up Netanyahu's head, did he 'remember' that meeting which ended with a hand gesture from which Filber understood that he had better help out Elowitz. During the primary interrogation, Filber even said that this meeting took place very close to his appointment to office, and this was per Netanyahu's request.
Wonder of wonders! Netanyahu's lawyer, Boaz Ben Tzur, proved during the counter-interrogation that during the first week in office, Filber was unable to meet with Netanyahu because he was busy with other matters. A cursory inspection which any dozens of investigators or lawyers from the prosecution could have made, revealed that the main claim upon which the prosecution had based their case, was nonexistent. Someone on their side failed to check or clarify, apparently happy that finally, they had a 'smoking gun' evidence against Netanyahu.
Except that it was totally fictitious. The proofs which the prosecution presented to the court do not contradict the timetable referred to in the charges. That so-called 'briefing,' the very basis of the prosecution's case, never took place on the date which Filber claimed after being appointed to office.
Now the prosecution wishes to alter the charges so that they state that the meeting took place at "an unknown time" before Filber's appointment. Thus it hopes to reestablish the Case 4000 which is crumbling. In fact the prosecution failed by presenting charges full of holes, baseless and altogether illusory. It is grasping unto the 'corners' of the court in order to preserve its lost honor.
As already stated, the court is at a crossroads and if it does not pitch the prosecution down all the stairs, Netanyahu will really have cause for concern.
