Lod Court Convicts Man of Sexually Abusing Wife's Niece, Criticizes Police
The Central District Court in Lod convicted a man of sexually abusing his wife's niece over three years, while acquitting him of severe charges due to police investigation flaws.
The Central District Court in Lod has convicted a central Israel resident of a series of sexual offenses committed against his wife's minor niece over a period of approximately three years. While finding him guilty of indecent acts and sexual harassment, the judges acquitted the defendant of sodomy and attempted rape due to reasonable doubt, while heavily criticizing the police's handling of the case.
According to the verdict, the defendant abused his wife's niece from the time she was 11 until she reached 14 and a half. He sexually harassed her, integrated sexual content into their conversations, tracked her movements at family gatherings, and attempted to isolate her. In one instance, when the minor resisted contact by explaining she observes "shomer negiah" (avoiding physical contact with the opposite sex), the defendant replied: "Uncles don't observe shomer negiah."
Court Findings and Partial Acquittal
The court convicted the defendant solely on acts testified to by the complainant, including slapping her backside when she went to retrieve a charger from a car, and touching her waist and chest while walking in the street. Judges Ami Kobo, Michael Kreshen, and Merav Greenberg noted that her testimony left a reliable impression, devoid of any prior conflict or motive to fabricate.
Despite this, the defendant was acquitted due to doubt on three severe charges involving sodomy and attempted rape, which allegedly occurred in the home living room and during a Shabbat Hatan event. The judges found significant difficulties in these charges after several family members provided testimonies contradicting the complainant's version, in some cases completely ruling out the girl's presence in the room where the assault allegedly took place.
Severe Police Investigation Flaws
The defense argued during the trial that some events took place in open areas of the house and pointed out substantial flaws in the police work. The judges accepted this claim, severely criticizing the investigators. The verdict stated that crucial details, easily verifiable, came to light for the first time only inside the courtroom.
"These are genuine investigative failures," the judges ruled, explaining that professional investigation could have narrowed the indictment earlier or removed the doubts regarding the complainant's testimony that ultimately led to the acquittal.
The prosecution argued that the witness was consistent and authentic, emphasizing her version was supported by her friend's, sister's, and mother's testimonies. However, gaps in testimonies from other family members and police failures tipped the scale toward acquittal on the severe charges, alongside the conviction on the remaining counts.
