Talansky to stay in US despite testimony date

Dramatic turn of event: Morris Talansky's attorney, Jacques Chen, informed the Justice Ministry Thursday that his client will not be returning to Israel for his second testimony, scheduled for late August.

The American businessman is the State's key witness in the case against Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in its investigation into him allegedly receiving illicit fund.

In a letter sent to the ministry, Chen claimed that although he asked his client to return to Israel, his American counsels have advised him against it; citing Talansky may incriminate himself during his testimony.

"Since Mr. Talansky returned from Israel, in connection with the ongoing investigation of Prime Minister Olmert, we have learned that he is the subject of a grand jury investigation in the United States District Court for the East District of New York," attorneys Bradley Simon and Neal Sher wrote.

By cooperating with Israeli authorities, they said, Talansky "has placed himself in legal jeopardy in the United States."

Talansky underwent a five-day cross examination by Olmert's legal team in mid July; during which he was confronted with a series of contradictions in his police deposition.

While on the witness stand, Talansky admitted to not being completely truthful in his deposition, claiming he was under a great deal of stress during it.

Talansky's depositions, as were his testimony and cross examination, are all part of the pre-trail legal proceedings in State's investigation. Should an indictment be filed against the PM, the State Prosecutor's Office will be able to use their records, as if given during an actual trial.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's legal team said Thursday they were "completely surprised" by the announcement; adding they would consider the "serious ramification it has on the case," before deciding on their next course of action.

'Absence won't affect decision to indict'

A statement subsequently issued by the Justice Ministry said that Talansky's announcement was something they had voiced concerns about in the past: "Our basis for asking the court to grant the pre-trial deposition was the concern that he may decide not to show up. We hope that despite this announcement his arrival for the testimony would be made possible."

A source in the State Prosecutor's Office said Thursday that Talansky's decision in unlikely to affect the State's final decision on whether or not to indict the prime minister.

If and when Attorney General Menachem Mazuz decides to indict Olmert, added the source, it would up to him to decide just how much weight Talansky's pre-trial deposition would carry in an actual court of law.

Prof. Ariel Bendor of the Bar-Ilan University Faculty of Law said that Talansky's decision to evade his second deposition may leave him vulnerable to legal action on the State Prosecutor's Office side.

"If while he was in Israel he signed a waiver specifying he would have to make himself available for future testimony, and he will not shoe up, the State Prosecutor's Office would be able to file charges against him whenever he arrives in Israel in the future.

"Mazuz has to realize that Talansky's deposition won't be able to wield as much influence as he had hoped," added Bendor. The court can also decide the have the deposition suppressed; and the defense, he estimated, may file a motion to that effect, or at least try to have the court declare the deposition as having minimal importance.

Although Talansky is a key witness in an ongoing case, the State Prosecutor's Office cannot compel him to come back to Israel. "Extradition procedures are meant for defendants, not witness," explained Bendor. "If the State decides to file and indictment against Talansky himself in the future – well, that's another story."

Efrat Weiss contributed to this report