Judge urges policemen accused of prisoner abuse to break silence
Ben-Or releases four from house arrest, criticizes their behavior during investigation into maltreatment of Palestinian detainee
Four police officers accused of abusing Palestinian prisoner A'alan Abu Najma will be released from house arrest, Jerusalem Magistrate's Court Judge Nava Ben-Or ruled Thursday. The judge also allowed the publication of their names, but the defense counsel has been given time to appeal this decision.
The judge also strongly criticized the accused and their comrades who did not reveal information regarding the case during the investigation.
"Looking over statements submitted by the police officers who were arrested in this grave affair leaves the impression that they concealed more than they revealed," Ben-Or said.
"It is difficult not to conclude that some of the police officers investigated know far more than they are prepared to say, and not necessarily because they are afraid to incriminate themselves. Sadly, it seems that this cover-up attempt also involves police detectives who avoided translating the complainant's claims for the investigator."
"Protecting comrades who, it is suspected, did appalling things, was preferable in their opinion to revealing the truth," the judge continued. "They do not understand that they thus stain the entire organization. But it is not too late. Perhaps after hearing these words, those who know what happened that night will reconsider and understand that those at the forefront of law enforcement are expected to cooperate with investigation authorities, and to tell the truth."
The judge ordered the accused to hand over their passports and tender NIS 50,000 ($13,000) in cash as guarantee that they would turn up at their trial and comply with the terms of their release. She also ordered that two additional guarantors also sign personal securities for a similar sum.
Ben-Or wrote in her ruling, "From what has been heard till now, the only possible conclusion is that there are grounds for arrest just from the risk that stems from their acts alone. The question is whether total house arrest is the right alternative. I am not convinced that there is a need for this. Apart from the events under discussion – however grave they may be – the defendants have no criminal record, and not even relevant breaches of discipline."
The judge also explained why she had decided to release the accuse.
"I am not convinced that there are real grounds for concern that the police officers will carry out similar acts during the course of their trial," she wrote.
"The only other reason for detention could be fear of distortion of justice, which stems from the behavior of the accused during their investigation, and after evidence has been gathered and indictments have been filed against them, this fear does not justify full house arrest either."
