Monday, December 11th | 23 Kislev 5778

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
April 2, 2016 11:27 pm

IDF Soldier Who Shot Immobilized Terrorist Won’t Face Murder Charge

avatar by JNS.org

Email a copy of "IDF Soldier Who Shot Immobilized Terrorist Won’t Face Murder Charge" to a friend
IDF soldiers in Hebron. Photo: Wikipedia.

IDF soldiers in Hebron. Photo: Wikipedia.

JNS.org – An Israel Defense Forces soldier who recently shot a neutralized terrorist in the head in Hebron, sparking controversy over his actions, will likely be charged with manslaughter and not murder, IDF prosecutor Lt. Col. Edoram Rigler said Thursday at a military court in Qastina.

Military court judge Lt. Col. Ronen Shor decided Thursday to release the soldier to open custody on a military base. While in custody, he will be forbidden from carrying a weapon and from making direct or indirect contact with relevant witnesses in the case.

At a hearing on Friday, the prosecution asked to have the soldier’s remand extended until next Thursday to facilitate the advancement of the investigation, noting the importance of not interfering with upcoming forensic testing and the autopsy of the terrorist. The autopsy, scheduled for Sunday, will determine whether the shot fired by the soldier in custody in fact killed him.

Military prosecutor Col. Sharon Zagagi-Pinhas said, “There are two main foundations that we believe form the basis for a clear evidential picture: the videos, of which we will present one main video to the court; and the comments made by the soldier immediately after the incident, specifically, ‘the terrorist has to die,’ which demonstrate the spirit and motivation underlying the act.”

The soldier’s lawyer, Eyal Beserglick, said in his client’s defense, “We need to put ourselves in the soldier’s shoes in real-time, not in a video. The scene is explosive, there are people screaming that the terrorist is still alive and has a bomb. The terrorist is wearing a coat that looks like a flak jacket on a very hot day. The Magen David Adom emergency services staff on site is not authorized to approach the terrorist because of concerns over an explosive device. The soldiers are also keeping their distance, and before the gunfire, you cannot get closer to the terrorist. When we asked [on Thursday] if transporting the terrorist from the area could have meant transporting a bomb, they said they still did not know. Additionally, there were concerns about a mixed [stabbing and bombing] attack.”

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Why does President Obama insist Israeli soldiers and Police Officers given less rights than US Law Enforcement ?
    In 2015 The Supreme Court made a landmark decision (By an 8-1 vote ) concerning Police use of deadly force. This was concerning especially use of deadly force by police officers against fleeing suspects. This 8 to 1 ruling that officers are immune from lawsuits unless it is “beyond debate” that a shooting was unjustified and clearly unreasonable. The ruling bolsters previous decisions that give police the benefit of the doubt when they encounter a potentially dangerous situation.
    It is important to remember that a police officer is allowed to use force based on reasonable belief. Therefore, if a police officer reasonably believes that a suspect whom he is trying to arrest has committed a rape, the police officer may use deadly force, and that deadly force will be considered justified even if it turns out that the officer’s reasonable belief was wrong. See Bursack v. Davis, 225 N.W. 738 (Wis. 1929). Has not reasonable belief already been established for IDF & Israeli Police officers when confronted by an ongoing tidal wave of terrorist attacks? In addition compounded probably of suicide bombings to shooting assaults ?
    For American Law Enforcement & Civilians: Scissors and everyday items can be classified as deadly weapons. This all depends on the way that the item is used. For example, if a pair of scissors is used to inflict serious harm on another person, the scissors may then be considered a deadly weapon, even though they weren’t designed for that purpose. Law Enforcement or Civilian Use of Deadly Force, they can use deadly force, “with no duty to retreat,” in self-defense or defense of others when there is reasonable belief that self-defense is necessary against death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, arson or burglary.
    If a person demonstrates no intent to surrender, demonstrated the intent to pursue action(s) which would cause serious bodily injury or death to a Police Officer or others, it has been adjudicated that a Police Officer or Civilian has the right to use deadly force.
    I am an Certified NRA Pistol instructor (since 1994). For many years while living in Utah I was licensed by the State to conduct Concealed Weapons Permit classes, required for obtaining a Concealed weapons permit, this included lectures concerning use of deadly force. In addition I have 4 years Military Police & 8yrs as a Correctional Officer.

  • Neil

    Why is he even being charged? Every day Israelis face islamic scum doing their utmost to kill them and the government are complicit in the attacks as they allow islam to flourish in Israel.

Algemeiner.com