Omri Burberg
Photo: Yaron Brener
Leonardo Corea
Photo: Yaron Brener
Naalin shooting trial underway
Military Court hears opening arguments in case accusing former Battalion 71 commander, one of his soldiers of shooting bound Palestinian detainee
A Tel Aviv Military Court heard the opening arguments in Naalin shooting case Thursday.
Former Battalion 71 Commander Lieutenant-Colonel Omri Burberg and Staff Sergeant Leonardo Corea stand accused of a shooting incident which took place in the West Bank town of Naalin, in July of 2008. During the incident, a bound Palestinian protestor who was apprehended during an anti-security fence rally was shot.
Burberg faces intimidation charges, while Corea face a charge of illegal use of a firearm.
Related stories:
- Naalin commander may get prison sentence
- Rights groups challenge Naalin indictment
- Naalin commander ordered to go on 10-day leave
- Soldier who fired in Naalin incident arrested
Prosecutor Lt.-Col. (Res.) Ronen Ketzef told the court the evidence shows that Burberg never actually ordered the Palestinian be shot.
"He chose only to threaten him and so we have decided to file intimidation charges against him. The soldier began shooting for no apparent reason and we know that he was not given an order to do so and in any case, you do not open fire at a bound detainee."
The two were initially indicted for conduct unbecoming – an offense which does not result in a criminal record. The indictment was changed following a High Court ruling ordering harsher charges be filed. If convicted, both Burberg and Corea will have a criminal record.
The evidentiary stage of the trial is set to begin within the next few weeks. The prosecution told the court it intends to refrain from making a sentencing recommendation until the verdict is rendered.
Defense attorneys Shlomi Zipori and Colonel Uzi Ben-Eliezer, for Burberg, said they were satisfied with the prosecution's argument, which cemented their claim that their client never ordered the Palestinian shot.
Attorney Asher Chen, for Corea, said that the prosecution's opening argument failed to articulate the actual event and maintained that his client was simply following orders.
