By Noam Federman, Published by The Society for Protection of the Legal Rights of the Jewish Citizen

Know Your Legal Rights!

A guide to protecting Jewish civil liberties in the land of Israel

Forward

In these days, when many Jews are murdered in the war for our Land and the Israeli Government does not dispatch its full duties in the protection and safety of its citizens, often the individual citizen finds himself in dire situations in which he is thrown into conflict with the "legal" authorities.

Due to such and other Police-citizen conflicts, people are summoned by the Police or the Security Agencies to undergo interrogations.

The policeman in charge of the interrogation does not explain all the legal rights to the person called for interrogation. The average citizen at times admits to things he did not do, he incriminates his friends, he ties himself in legal knots resulting in criminal prosecutions, and at times he brings about his own arrest, prosecution and possibly even imprisonment.

People, unaware of their full legal rights, brought on themselves various forms of legal restrictions during the recent months, house arrests, detentions etc. and at times even worse.

This dire situation would be avoided if this booklet were available to them ahead of time.

This booklet is written in uncomplicated language and avoids legalistic terms. The person reading it can learn:

a. What are his legal rights from the very first moment he is summoned by the police?

b. How the interrogators facing him are likely to behave and what is their goal.

c. How to respond to his interrogators and mainly what not to say to them.

This booklet contains examples from recent cases. These examples should illustrate to the reader the consequences of certain actions or admissions, consequences that the suspect can unwittingly bring down on himself.

Clearly this booklet can not cover all the possible cases involved in the legal interrogation process facing the suspect or witness but it can and does cover the main points.

Notwithstanding all that was said above, this booklet does not come in place of legal counsel.

If a person becomes involved in legal/penal complications and he has the possibility, the means to receive legal counsel he must not hesitate but seek that counsel. Every case has its individual aspects and complications and wise, experienced counsel can give the best advice at the right time.

We have to understand that the Prosecution and the Police want to "break" the "political right" and therefore they wage constant, unrelenting combat and stoop to unprovoked harassment against the "rightists", using all the many means at their disposal. Our response to their harassment and prosecution is therefore part of our dedicated struggle for the Land of Israel.

May it be His will that this booklet should help open the eyes of those "faithful to G-d, the Nation and the Land", guide and save them from falling into legal embroilment and all other troubles.

Noam Federman - Hebron

This is the second and updated edition, the price of the booklet is NIS 10 to cover the printing and distribution costs.

 The following is an excerpt from an article in "All the Time" in the Maariv newspaper.

All the Time They stayed in the underground In Shaba"k they were helpless due to the silence of Pas and Shevo.

Expose by Meir Svisa

The lack of cooperation and response of the Jews to questions posed during their interrogation troubles the Shaba"k investigators gravely. A year ago the spokesman of the Jewish community of Hebron, the extreme rightist who has undergone many arrests and interrogations, Noam Federman, published a special booklet which was distributed in thousands of copies among extreme rightist activists. The booklet describes the interrogation methods of the Shaba"k, ways the suspect should handle himself in this pressurized environment, and an absolute recommendation to keep quiet, not to respond to the interrogators' questions. The booklet was received by almost everyone in the Hebron Jewish community likely to come face to face with the Shaba"k investigators in the future. Yitzhak Pas and his brother-in-law Mati Shevo, who were arrested two weeks ago, seem to have learned parts of the booklet by heart. In their interrogation Pas and Shevo were asked if they learned to keep silent and handle themselves during the interrogation by reading the Federman booklet, but also to this question they naturally refused to respond.

Interrogation Summons

These days many people receive a police form entitled "Interrogation Summons". Usually policemen come to the house of the suspect or witness, knock on his door and hand the summons to one of the family at the door. The summons, addressed to the suspect or witness, directs him to appear before a specific policeman for interrogation. The time of interrogation is usually specified as the next day or a very close date. The addressee receiving the summons usually responds immediately and makes himself available for the interrogation at the specified time.

Should he really behave in this fashion? Does he have to appear at the summoned hour, at the convenience of the interrogating policeman, even though he loses a workday because of his appearance?

As strange as it might seem the categorical answer is no!!!

When a person receives an invitation to a wedding, a summons to a wedding, does he have to attend, at the appointed time, or does it depend on his good will? Here the answer seems clear, thus also when he is invited, summoned to an interrogation. It depends on his good will -- if he wants he can come, if it is not convenient he can miss it.

Consequences of non-appearance

Every action has its consequences and when the person summoned does not show at the appointed time policemen will visit his house again bringing another summons with a future date. If he will again ignore the summons the police will petition the Court to issue a Court summons for interrogation. The Court summons will be delivered by the police and they will then arrest and bring him for the interrogation in accordance with the directives of the Court summons.

If such is the case -- what is the profit in non-appearance?

There is a double profit in such behavior:

1. The more time that elapses between the misdemeanor and the interrogation, the importance of the misdemeanor diminishes naturally, the memory is weakened and so also the future consequences.

2. A person should not be cast in the role of a police-vassal, a rag for them to tread on whenever they want. Further, the police are not always able to mobilize a force for the arrest. The petition for a Court summons and the dispatch of an extra force are time-consuming and expensive, thus the police investigators might try to reach a compromise with the person to be summoned as to the time of interrogation and recognize him as a legal entity deserving consideration.

In all cases, even when the person summoned is arrested and brought in for interrogation, since he ignored several previous summonses, at the end of the interrogation he will usually be released, under the same conditions as if he had come forward immediately of his own accord.

These pointers are written with full responsibility in accordance with past experience. Again it is emphasized that this applies to a summons for interrogation.

When the police want to arrest a person on a specific charge, a charge that warrants arrest, the police are not likely to send the suspect an Interrogation Summons, but will rush to arrest him, without issuing and bringing him the said summons.

Is there a middle-way, a compromise?

Yes, the person summoned can call the interrogating officer, his name appears on the summons form, and explain that the date specified is not convenient and ask to move it to a more convenient, mutually agreeable date. Remember, the more time that elapses between the misdemeanor and the interrogation the better for the suspect.

Summons by telephone

If a person calls you on the telephone, identifies himself as a policeman and summons you to an interrogation it is possible that he is playing a practical joke on you or even that it is the work of a terrorist cell trying to set you up for a kidnapping. In this case hang up and ignore it. However, if your curiosity gets the best of you, and you continue the conversation in which the caller persuades you of his real police identity, ask and insist on being sent a proper summons by courier or mail so you can see the reason for the summons and seek advice in accordance.

Site of the interrogation

When a person is summoned for interrogation at a site far from his home, for example: a resident of Samaria summoned for interrogation in Jerusalem he should weigh his response. It is evident that this summons is meant to harass the Samaria resident, and in these days, due to the terror attacks on Samaria roads, such travel also poses a life-danger. The summoned resident should inform the summoning officer that he should find a closer site for the interrogation and not put his life in danger or harass him.

Summons to Investigation

Summons to Investigation should be distinguished from an Interrogation Summons; its aim is generally to facilitate a meeting with operatives of the Security Services (Shaba"k) or the Police Intelligence Unit. In spite of all the declarations to the contrary the Security Services are still trying to enlist agents to infiltrate the rightist and settlement movement in all ways possible. One of the more obvious ways to enlist new agents is the use of the Summons to Investigation which is used by the Security Services to try to persuade the summoned person to rat on his friends and turn into a snitch or double-agent.

Another use of the Summons to Investigation is to warn and scare a rightist who seems too active in the view of the Security Services. They will talk with him and explain that he is at the "edge of the abyss" and if he continues so he might spend the rest of his life behind bars. This type of warning-conversation is a true copy of the methods used by the Russian K.G.B. Services. Its aim is to scare the person summoned and no more.

When a person is summoned to this type of investigation he will do well to ignore these repetitious summons efforts of the Police or the Security Services. However, if he was tempted to present himself for investigation and indeed he realizes that they are trying to enlist him, and he has no interest to continue playing into their hands, he should inform them that he has no intention to continue these meetings. If the Security Services continue pressuring him, the best counter-action is to tell his friends of the incident and inform the Security Services that he will bring a friend to the next meeting. The eminence of the Security Services is enhanced by their secrecy, when their activities are exposed their operations and goals become confused. In all these cases if in doubt it is wise to seek the advice of people with suitable experience.

The Police are at your Door

When a policeman arrives at the door of a suspect, the suspect should carefully examine what warrant or summons he holds: an Arrest Warrant or a Search Warrant or other.

It is important to examine the type of warrant since not all warrants entitle the policeman to enter your house. Only an Arrest Warrant entitles him to enter your home.

If the policeman only holds a Summons to Investigation not only is it not incumbent to let him into the house it is also permissible to slam the door in his face and not to accept the summons. One can say to the policeman: "the named suspect, Moishelle, is not home, good-bye" and then close the door. There is no advantage in being polite to those that seek your downfall.

On the other hand if the policemen present an Arrest Warrant there is no way to bar his entry short of calling the neighbors and causing a loud commotion. It is important to cry out against the injustice and evil ways of the Police, for who knows what they planned for you.

Even with an Arrest Warrant the policeman is not entitled to take possessions from the house. Only a Search Warrant signed by a Judge entitles the policeman to gather objects of evidence. In the case of a Search Warrant you should examine it to see what specific objects the issuing Judge specified in the warrant he signed. The search should be executed in the presence of two witnesses. They should follow the actions of the policemen to see that all is done in accordance with the law. There are known cases where the police found objects that were not in the house prior to the search, the evidence was planted by them.

The Police have to return all the objects confiscated in the search as soon as possible unless they serve as evidence in an ongoing case. In the past there were many cases where firearms were taken for ballistic tests and not returned. Therefore, if firearms were taken for testing, and the police neglected to return them in a reasonable period of time, and the firearms do not serve as evidence one can petition the Courts to issue a Return Order calling on the Police to return the said firearms or any other confiscated object.

The Interrogation

Prelude to the interrogation

When a person comes before the interrogating officer the interrogator fills out an official form called a detention or arrest form. This denotes that the police have decided to detain r arrest the suspect. The form bears the details identifying the suspect, the reason for the detention or arrest. After the form is filled out the suspect is requested to sign it, here the suspect should pay strict attention. The standard form includes the sentence "in the search on your body nothing was confiscated, nothing was taken from you and no harm was caused you". Naturally, not all cases follow the same script. There are cases where things are taken, damage is caused etc. the signing of this standard sentence might prevent you from lodging complaints against such occurrences in the future. If things are taken from you they have to be itemized on the form, it is important to verify this listing.

The suspect is requested to write his reaction or his version on this detention/ arrest form. It is very important to use caution in writing your reaction here so it should not be used against you in the future. It is wise to state laconically "I have done nothing wrong" or "I did not breach the law"!

Preliminary questioning

The interrogation does not always start out with the filling out of the detention statement form. The interrogation can start with preliminary questioning, an introductory chat of the investigator or investigators with the suspect. This is usually a session where the officer asks background questions concerning the crime and concerning the suspect. The purpose of this innocent looking session is to break the suspect even prior to his giving his written statement. The investigator does not usually write the suspect's responses but nevertheless the suspect should beware and take into account that the investigator can later write a memorandum of the session from memory. The memorandum will contain the questions posed by the investigator and the responses given by the suspect including side notes as to the suspect's state of mind, fidgeting etc. with all the overtones as the investigator sees fit. The Courts have on several occasions objected to this post-written memorandum and demanded that the memorandum should be written during the preliminary session when the suspect can see what is being recorded.

The weight such a preliminary session, where the suspect was not warned that his responses or anything he says might be used against him, is not large. The Courts have on several occasions thrown confessions of suspects where these confessions were not preceded by the standard warning that they might be used against them. However, it is important to be aware that the Courts stand on this is far from being uniform in their attitude to this sort of self-incrimination. The suspect or witness should therefore consider this preliminary questioning as the real thing and weigh his words with the utmost caution.

The suspect can reap benefits from a preliminary session since the investigator has to reveal some of his hidden cards and the suspect can thus learn what the police hold against him and how much they know. In all such cases there is no point in prolonging this session with the investigators. These preliminary sessions serve as "ice breakers" and the suspect can become emotionally beholden to these nice investigators who, on their side, are only seeking to incriminate him.

Written interrogation

Firstly, you should pay attention which form the investigator holds; there are two main forms at this stage: the Witness Form and the Confession Form.

The Witness Form is used to gather information not necessarily from the suspect, could be any person who witnessed or was present at the place of the crime.

The Confession Form is used, as the name implies, to take down the confession or statement of the accused (this form is used even when the accused does not confess). When the Confession Form is filled out the investigator has to pre-warn the suspect that all he says can be used against him. In spite of the requirement that the suspect be fore-warned the Courts are lenient at times with the police when a Witness Form is filled out and later it is used against the witness who has now become the accused. In all cases, the relative weight of statements taken without the usual warning that are later used against the person making the statement are less than statements following such a standard warning to the suspect.

Before recording the confession the interrogator will write down the personal details of the suspect, his name, Id. Number, address, telephone, his work address and his parents address. These details serve to enable the authorities to locate the suspect in the future. The suspect can request that the interrogator not write down some of his details if he has a sensible reason for the request, for example: his address or his work address. What is a sensible reason in this case? Fear that the availability of his address or work address will help his accuser to bring civil damage suits against him, if he has caused him some damage.

Before recording the confession the interrogator has to tell the suspect what he is accused of, and on which crimes he is about to be interrogated, the suspicion has to be fully defined and not just general. The interrogator, for example can not say you are accused of staging a wild rally without specifying the time, place and nature of the rally and the part of the accused in it.

After specifying the "crime" he is accused of the interrogator has to read him his rights. You are not required to say anything unless you wish to, however your refusal to respond might be taken as an admission of guilt.

In conclusion of this formal part of the interrogation the interrogator will sign his name and police number and he will also request that the suspect do the same if he understood the suspicion leveled against him. A suspect who did not fully understand the suspicion facing him should request that the interrogator repeat and elaborate his explanation. The signing of this form is not important unless the accused puts in writing his reason for refusing to sign it. For example: "the interrogator refuses to explain the suspicion against me, and since I don't understand what I am being accused of I refuse to sign that I understand". After all these formal procedures the version of the suspect is recorded. From this point on all that the accused says or writes will constitute his version, his confession, and he will have to stand by it in the future.

The suspect should know that in spite of all the jokes about policemen (one can write and the other one can read etc.) the interrogator is much more experienced than the suspect. Then interrogator questioned many suspects before you and therefore he is probably smarter in the questioning game than you. In addition, the investigation file is in his hands, he studied the file and knows what it contains and what is missing in it. A suspect who told his version of the events under investigation has to stick to this version, but he must be aware before giving his version that he is not privy to all the facts the police possesses. For example, it happened many times that a suspect made up a colluded alibi with one of his friends and now he wants to include this alibi in his statement to the police, what he didn't know was that this friend was already interrogated and broke giving the details of the colluded alibi. The examples of the lack of knowledge of the accused of facts known to the police are many and therefore the suspect should be very wary before opening his mouth and should consider carefully if it pays him to give his version of events. His own version, even though he sees an immediate advantage in it, might be harmful to him in the long run.

It has happened many times that a suspect felt pressured to give a version since the police promised to release him. Indeed, he was released, but soon after a new writ was issued against him based on his own version and he sat in prison for a long time. Therefore consider well, it is better to sit in prison for several days or even weeks but not to sit for years due to a hastily cooked up version.

As previously said, the interrogator warns the suspect that lack of response on his part might strengthen the case against him. Therefore it might pay to give a primary version which will serve to remove the onus of lack of cooperation, but the version has to be general and flexible so that the suspect will not find it hard to stand by it. For example: "I did not break the law, and since this is a politically motivated investigation I will not countenance it by further replies". The suspect has in this general answer denied all suspicions against himself, answered the main question which was whether he admits to the events he is suspected of, yet he did not give a detailed version which might be hard to live with in the future. The suspect has also prevented the interrogator reaping the benefits of his labored questioning.

If the suspect is not sure of his primary, general version he will do well not to say anything rather than admit to a version that might harm him in the future.

An alibi is a category onto itself. If the suspect has a solid alibi it is best to put it on the table immediately. A suspect who volunteers an alibi late in the questioning should not be surprised if the police and the Court might find it hard to believe him. The obvious reasoning is that if the suspect had a genuine alibi he would have declared it right away and not kept quiet about it and suffered through the questioning.

Important to know: even when a person is apprehended in the act it is not the end of the world, and he does not have to "spill the beans" in his interrogation. There were cases where the suspect was found innocent or just released due to police errors therefore it is preferable to keep quiet even in cases of obvious guilt. It has happened many times that when a suspect was caught he admitted to prior crimes, crimes he was not even asked about and thus he harmed himself grievously. Therefore, when a suspect decides to confess, he should not volunteer information beyond the case he is questioned on.

A suspect who has, in spite of all, decided to cooperate with the police and to give his version, an action not recommended, should think ten or even twenty times before answering any question. Thinking before formulating an answer is a basic right and the investigator can not force the suspect to respond before he has thought out his response.

At the conclusion of the interrogation the interrogator will ask the suspect to sign his statement. The signing of this statement is not important unless the accused was forced, by physical or other means, to make statements contrary to his free will, or the interrogator wrote things the suspect did not say and in spite of the objections of the suspect they still appear in the report. In such cases the suspect should demand that the interrogator specify that the accused refuses to sign due to the misbehavior of the interrogator and that the interrogator has breached the rules of proper behavior.

Decision, what to do with the suspect

At the conclusion of the interrogation, the interrogator in accordance with the decision of the Chief of Investigations, has to inform the suspect what will be done with him next: if the material gathered so far warrants his arrest or if he is to be released. The interrogator does not have to decide right away what action to follow, he can play on the nerves of the suspect or just seek the advice of the Chief of Investigations. The suspect during this nerve-wrecking prelude has to keep his cool and not show a great desire to get home otherwise the police will use this against him.

At times, when the suspect refuses to confess to the accusations against him, the investigators can play a known trick on him. They inform him that due to his denials he will be detained, he will stand trail and be imprisoned. As mentioned above, during this critical prelude the suspect must force himself to keep his cool and self- assurance and not show any anxiety. He should think and say that he is willing to suffer imprisonment to prove his innocence, he is willing to sit in prison until his innocence comes to light.

As said above, at the conclusion of the interrogation the suspect will be informed as to what will be done with him next:

Conditional Release

In the case of a conditional release the interrogator will have the suspect sign a Release Bond. The interrogator can also demand a third party guarantor sign the bond. In this case the suspect will be permitted to call his family or friends in order that they come to the police station to sign this third party Release Bond.

The purpose of this Release Bond is usually to make sure that the suspect will attend future interrogations, when summoned, or show-up in Court for his trail. Here the suspect should pay strict attention to what release conditions he or the third party guarantor are being asked to sign. There are additional conditions which can be included in the Release Bond, some conditions which are difficult to keep, such as: staying out of a geographic area, even if it is your home, or a prohibition on speaking with certain friends who are also involved in this case under investigation etc. Here again one has to use his best judgment and not sign the Release Bond automatically, under any conditions. There are cases where people agreed to sign on conditions of house-arrest and paid for it dearly, they lost their job, their livelihood and chalked up tremendous debts to their friends and neighbors. Therefore one has to consider very carefully before accepting such limiting release conditions. A suspect who does not agree to the release conditions offered him will be brought before a Judge. The Judge will consider if the release conditions, offered by the police, are reasonable in the specific case. If he finds them extreme he will get the police to decrease them or cancel them altogether. True that in this process the suspect is exposed to certain suffering, but the police also do not enjoy having to justify themselves in Court.

The interrogator might ask to fingerprint the suspect or to photograph him. Here also the acquiescence should not be automatic. Lately, this procedure of fingerprinting and photographing was discussed in the Court of Jerusalem several times and they agreed that this process does not have to be agreed to unconditionally. Some of the objections accepted by the Court centered on the fact that photographing involves some degree of humiliation and thus is contrary to the basic rights of the accused, a right included in the Basic Law of Man's Freedom and Honor. Concerning fingerprinting, the Court agreed that the process should be allowed if needed for the investigation, but not just because the police want the fingerprints. These Court decisions were handed down in the Jerusalem District Court by their Honors, Judge Moshe Ravid and Tzvi Segal.

The term "fingerprints needed for the investigation" means that a person is suspected of a crime during which he left fingerprints at the location of the crime. For example: a break-in, burglary, stolen car etc. In such cases the police gather the fingerprints left at the scene of crime and they compare them with fingerprints in the Police files. In such a case there is certainly a sensible justification for fingerprinting the suspect. However, if a person was detained at a protest rally or he is accused of participating in an illegal assembly, or entering an "Army Restricted Area" what can his fingerprints help in the investigation of the case against him???

In the examples above we discussed fingerprints and photographs because they are the most frequent. There are other evidence gathering activities that fall into the same category, for instance: hand-immersion in crimes of use of firearms. The purpose of the immersion procedure is to find traces of gunpowder on the hands or clothes of the suspect. During a shooting the gunpowder flies out and sticks to the hands, hair, or clothes of people very close to the firearm used in the shooting. The procedure is only effective if performed close to the time of the suspected shooting, before the suspect had a chance to wash his hands thoroughly or to change his clothes. Also suspicion of arson can be verified using a modified immersion procedure which seeks burned particles on the suspect's clothes, hair, or hands.

Imprisonment

If the police decide to imprison the suspect he will be brought before an arresting officer for an "arrest interview". The use of quotation marks over the arrest interview is used to indicate that this is a new procedure forced on the Police by a new Arrest Law for this specific purpose. The interview allows the officer to review all the facts and decide on the arrest, it also gives the suspect a last chance to persuade the officer that the arrest is not warranted or not necessary. This was the theory, it allowed the officer a broad ability of judgment based on his experience. In practice the police officers emasculated the procedure and turned it into a formal procedure where the officer informs the suspect that he is to be bound over for initial imprisoned and asks for his reaction which he writes down. The suspect's reactions are written down by the officer and can also be used against him, so it behooves him to weigh his words with utmost care.

The initial imprisonment can be for up to twenty-four hours only. After that, if the police want to continue the imprisonment, they have to bring the prisoner to Court to have him bound over for an extended imprisonment period.

After the arresting officer informs the suspect that he will be imprisoned the suspect has the right to make two telephone calls, one to his family and the other to his attorney. The telephone calls are to enable the imprisoned to inform them of his predicament. The telephone calls do not have to be made personally by the person imprisoned. In many cases the officer makes the calls in the presence of the suspect and informs his family and the attorney of the suspect's imprisonment.

The Police do not always follow the directives very strictly, especially as far as the rights of the suspects are concerned. If the arresting officer has not asked the suspect if he wants to notify someone of his imprisonment he has to demand it. Generally, the Police in many cases do not behave as you would expect a National Police to behave, whenever a suspect or prisoner detects misbehavior, infringement of his rights, he should protest loudly. There are several ways to protest starting with lack of cooperation, loud voluble protest, shouts, hunger strike etc.

Appeal against the initial imprisonment

If the imprisonment is not-warranted, capricious imprisonment, where the only purpose is to harm the prisoner, to rob him of his freedom, the suspect can have his attorney petition the Courts in a procedure called a Rush Appeal against an Initial Arrest. The written appeal is passed to the Court explaining why the suspect maintains that this is a capricious arrest only meant to do him harm. The appeal will be brought before the duty Judge, he will read it, and if he thinks that the appeal is warranted he will convene a Court hearing to discuss the arrest. The participants at the hearing will be the appellant-prisoner, and the arresting officer escorted by a Police representative. The hearing will give the two sides an opportunity to present their case.

The Prison

The prisoner is lead into the prison cell. There are crimes that the Police want to solve very much and the prison is at times the right environment to break the spirit of the accused and to get him to talk. At times he will talk here and tell things he would normally not have dreamt of admitting, not even under the strictest interrogation.

Sometimes the police use a professional informer and plant him in the suspect's cell. The informer will, during friendly chats concerning "what did you do to end up here and what they think I did", slip in questions that are to reveal the suspect's secrets or he might record the suspect's conversation when he speaks with other people. There are also very troublesome situations where the suspect's friend was broken by the police in some other case and in order to save his own skin he agreed to involve his friends, to rat on them etc. Therefore the suspect must know that his battle was not finished when he left the interrogator, his battle goes on and on until he is freed from the prison or sentenced on the crime he was suspected of.

The suspect will do wisely if he will not discuss his interrogation with the prison inmates. He can discuss any subject under the sun except the crimes he is suspected of, or any other crimes at all. He can say that the police suspect him of this certain crime but he was certainly not involved, and is innocent and that is all he should say!

Life in the prison is not the "end of the world", you can pray, read, learn, and even rest. It is important to keep up your spirits, display a good, happy disposition and not let them break you because of a few days in prison. Everyone does army service of several years, or reserve duty of several weeks, this should also be your attitude regarding your stay in prison.

There is a known problem with the kashrut of the food in prison. Officially, the food is kosher, but since the prisoners help prepare the food, and most of them do not care for kashrut, they do not pay attention and at times mix the dishes, or bring in food from the outside. There are prisoners who eat specially prepared mehadrin kosher food; there is the possibility to demand that your mehadrin food be brought in from the outside. A vegetarian can ask to be served vegetarian food. This requires a medical examination, if the prison physician agrees, the prisoner will be served a vegetarian diet from the prison kitchen or he too can have his food brought in from the outside.

Imprisonment extended

The police can prolong the suspect's imprisonment if they think the crime is a serious crime and they have some proof to it or if they want to scare the suspect by this extension.

The police have to notify the suspect's attorney of its intentions. This extension requires Court approval. The police have to present their request for extension before a Judge. The request has to be supported by some evidence or well based suspicions. Sometimes the police will present secret information to the Judge, for his eyes only. The secret information is used to impress the Judge though usually it is only a trick to win Court approval for the extension. After the police have presented their request the suspect's attorney can question the investigator and try to show that there is no case to prolong the suspect's suffering. Then the investigator summarizes his request for extension, then the attorney can argue against it, and in the end the Judge renders his verdict.

Usually the Judge acquiesces to the police request. The suspect should know that this whole procedure is not meaningful and he should go on with his life in prison as till now. The Judge might also be trying to break the suspect and end the case, or the police cheated and exaggerated the secret information, or possibly the police did find some clues tying the suspect into the case. However, all these possibilities do not indicate that the police have enough proof to win a real conviction, the material the police have is enough to have the suspect bound over for an initial prison term while they labor on with their investigation. Since the suspect is not privy to the material held by the police, he does not know why he was bound over for an extended prison term, he should not break down. He has to keep up his spirits, be optimistic, and loudly declare his innocence.

Remember what we said before: it is preferable to sit in prison for two months rather than two years.

Appeal against the Court decision

If it seems, on the face of it, that the decision by the Judge was mistaken, or there is an obvious miscarriage of justice, the suspect should appeal through his attorney in the higher District Court. The Prosecution Writ

The prosecution writ can be filed against a suspect during his pre-trail imprisonment period accompanied by a request for imprisonment until the culmination of the trail, or a request for a conditional release bearing various limitations on his freedom of movement or other such limitations. A suspect can also be released and the prosecution writ is filed at some later date.

These days, in order that a request for imprisonment until the culmination of trail be approved in Court it is not sufficient to bring proof against the accused. The Court has to determine that the release of the accused will constitute a danger to the public, or that the accused, if released, is likely to influence witnesses and disturb the investigation against himself, and also that there is no better option to leaving him in jail.

The suspect should remember that even if he is held till the end of trail it does not follow that the Court verdict will go against him. Many people were bound over till the end of trail and were later exonerated in Court. In approving the request for imprisonment until the end of trail the Judge checks that there is some proof against the accused and that he poses a public danger. In the trail some proof is not sufficient; the proof has to be above all reasonable doubt.

When a prosecution writ is filed against a released suspect it is sent via registered mail. A suspect, who expects the filing of such a writ against him has to carefully consider before visiting the post office to retrieve his registered mail which can include the said prosecution writ.

Interrogation by the Security Services (Shaba"k)

I will say at the outset, a Security Services interrogation is altogether a different story. Not everyone gets the privilege of facing a Shaba"k interrogation. The Security Services get involved only in cases of murder inspired by nationalistic zeal, the harboring, gathering or transportation of explosives, arms, and other war materiel to be used in terrorist or large scale criminal activities.

The Security Services posse equipment, manpower, and legal latitude beyond that possessed by the Police. The Security Services enlist the best investigators, people who studied psychology, criminology, social behavior, occupational therapy and other pertinent disciplines. The Shaba"k investigators know every trick in the book; they are constantly learning new tricks and improving the methods and efficiency of their operations. Every one of their interrogations is put on video; their every conversation is recorded and then written over on memoranda. They are allowed to record every conversation of a suspect and his attorney. Although such conversations are not admissible in Court, they are used internally, scanned for clues and proof.

After the interrogation the investigators study the recordings, they analyze every movement of the suspect, his every facial and body expression, his eye and mouth movement, and their analyses lead the next interrogation session. This process continues till they have squeezed their suspect dry, till they have built a psychological profile of the suspect which will enable them to predict his future actions. The best method to resist such an interrogation is to keep silent, don't move, don't utter a word. The less said, the less will the suspect expose himself, the less will they be able to perfect his "profile".

The golden rules the suspect should follow:

From the moment the suspect enters the Shaba"k interrogation chambers he must adopt special precautions, these must be his guiding rules during his unhappy stay:

The Shaba"k have their own jails. The conditions in these jails are much worse that the police jails. Every prisoner occupies a very compact, individual cell which is hardly large enough for him to stretch-out in. The cell does not have bathroom facilities; the prisoner gets a bucket for his needs which he empties during the lunch break. The cell also has a mattress and a covering blanket. Some of the Shaba"k jails are better and some worse, but their conditions can not compare to the regular police jails.

These prison cells were constructed intentionally individual and small with poor conditions so that the prisoner will feel isolated, distressed, and helpless. He will feel that he has no outside support and his only hope and relief can come from the interrogators who will deign to sit him down at a table and talk with him, he will become impatient for this seeming relief.

Many suspects thought innocently that they will be able to discuss with the interrogators only aspects not directly related to the current interrogation, possibly to persuade them of their proper behavior, possibly to make them see their point of view, change their political stance. The suspect should know that the interrogation room is not the proper place for such conversations. It is best to minimize the stay in the interrogation chamber, even if the conditions in the lock-up are harsher, the stay in the interrogation chamber can only be harmful to the suspect. The less the suspect says the shorter his stay in the interrogation chamber.

Prohibition on meeting an attorney

In many cases the Shaba"k does not inform anyone when they bring a person in for questioning and imprisonment, thus sometimes people just disappear as if the ground swallowed them. The Shaba"k can also issue orders forbidding the detainee or prisoner from meeting his attorney for up to twenty-one days. Here too the purpose is the isolate the suspect and break him down so he will tell the investigators all they want to know.

The investigator in charge of the interrogation can forbid the suspect meeting his attorney for ten days. This prohibition can be appealed in the District Court. This meeting prohibition can be extended by another eleven days through a request of the Government Legal Advisor to the District Court Chief Judge. The appeal against this prohibition has to go to the Supreme Court and the chances of receiving relief from this prohibition are rare. In most cases the Courts refuse to handle these appeals against the meeting prohibitions. However, the suspect should take heart from the fact that his non-cooperation has forced these actions on the Shaba"k, what this means that without the suspect's cooperation the Shaba"k has no case. So the prisoner, who was forbidden to meet his attorney, has to survive the twenty-one days, three weeks, knowing that his friends on the outside are working for him, and most important to keep his self-assurance and not believe the lies the Shaba"k agents are trying to feed him.

Pressure using family members

The Shaba"k will not hesitate to use family members of the suspect in order to get him to talk. Recently there were several cases where the Security Services detained or arrested the wife or mother of a suspect in order to put pressure on him to cooperate in the investigation. Therefore it is important that also your family members, all of them, read this booklet.

The Shaba"k agents can also arrange a meeting for the suspect with his family members, this is a special favor. If they make such an offer it has to be refused, they are again looking for the suspect's weak points; once he agrees to this they will play with his emotional weak points and get him to admit to whatever they want.

Remember: if you are in Shaba"k detention, you are at war with an enemy, therefore you are subject to the ruling of the Rambam in the Laws of Kings and Battles as follows: When a Jew enters into a battle he should rely on the Savior of Israel, who saves us in the time of our dire need. He should be aware that his battle is for the glory of G-d, he should be fearless and be ready for any sacrifice, he should not think of his wife or his children, he should put them far from his heart'.

The Shaba"k uses varied interrogation methods, sometime one interrogator will face the accused, then two will face together, then they might split up and face him individually. They will use different psychological approaches, including playing "good cop, bad cop" in order to win the suspect's trust. Then, at times, a whole group of interrogators will face the suspect and throw questions at him at top speed till the suspect gets confused and breaks down.

The Shaba"k interrogators don't allow for levity. Once the suspect said to the interrogators "if you bring me some felafel, an exotic sandwich, I will tell you what you want to know". They brought the felafel but the prisoner said he was only joking. But the recording had recorded his offer and in the interrogation memorandum the agent wrote that "the accused showed signs of willingness to confess". True this is not enough for a conviction in a Court of Law; this item alone can not bring the conviction. However, this is termed in legal terminology "beginning of admission", and it is accepted as the beginning of admission of guilt, and such an admission supported by other proofs can certainly lead to a conviction.

The detention cell

The Security Service agents use practices of denying sleep to the suspects so that his will to resist them and their questions will be weakened, he will break down and admit to almost anything just to get his sleep. Even in the prison cell the agents will disturb a suspect's sleep by playing loud, annoying Arab music close to his ear, and by other methods.

In all cases when the suspect finally arrives at his cell he should use his time in sleeping and not in self-flagellation or unproductive thoughts. The detention cell is fully equipped with hidden listening devices and cameras. The suspect should refrain from speaking with anyone in these surroundings. Don't look for friends just give yourself over to meditation and G-d. In many cases suspects in the same crime were put in close cells in the hope that they will speak to one another and the Shaba"k will get an ear-full. In a friend speaks to you about the case ignore him, even if he says that he already confessed all. Don't speak of football; don't discuss the Bible, and certainly not the current investigation.

He who guards his mouth and tongue saves his soul from trouble.

There were also cases were people were tortured physically, for example they were tied to a chair for endless hours and had to empty their bowels in their clothes. Some suspects had sacks draped over their heads; they were kicked and shaken for many hours. However, usually the Shaba"k agents tried to solve their cases without resort to such violence and through the use of more sophisticated methods, the agents are aware that physical violence sometimes strengthens the spirit of resistance of the suspect. Therefore, the agents will try to befriend the suspect, tell him how busy they are with the real war against the Arab terror, and how they admire and appreciate the suspect, and how they don't like the task they now have. All this is not to be believed! All this is show acting in order to tighten the snare around the suspect.

Appeals by the prisoner

Every prisoner who thinks that his rights were infringed by the interrogators can initiate a prisoner's appeal to the District Court and complain of the breach of his rights. If a prisoner wants to file such an appeal he has to request forms and pen from the policeman on duty, fill out the form and handed it to the policeman. It is entirely conceivable that the Shaba"k agents will not pass the appeal to the Court, therefore when he is brought to Court for the hearing on the extension oh his detention he should tell the Judge that he filed this appeal and ask him to check if the appeal was received and inquire as to its status.

The spirit of the suspect is the most important element in the face-off between him and the authorities. In depth psychological preparation by the suspect, a staunch decision not to be broken, not to admit to actions he did not perpetrate, no matter what, will certainly help him to weather this terrible ordeal.

In the following lines I will try to sketch the tricks that were perpetrated on several of the recent suspects. All the tricks have a single purpose to win the trust of the suspect and get him to divulge all he knows.

The slip of papers trick

A suspect sits in a Shaba"k cell, close by a maintenance man passes by sweeping the floor. They do not converse but on the morrow the same scene repeats itself and this time the floor-sweep strikes a routine conversation with the cell inmate. Later on the same day the floor-sweep returns bringing a slip from the inmate's friend saying that he too is in a cell close by and that he told the investigators this and that and asking "what did you say"?. The inmate unthinkingly takes a clear slip and responds in kind, in writing. Thus our inmate, thinking that he is sending a slip to his friend has sent some information to his interrogators.

The suspect should beware, he should know not to make light of these Shaba"k tricks. There was a case where a suspect heard of this "slip of papers" trick, and he thought he would outsmart the Security Services. When a floor-sweep handed him a slip he wrote back misleading information months later he was charged with obstruction of a security investigation and spent several months in prison to cure his smartness. The slip of paper trick is played in different versions: an inmate goes to shower and leaves his shoes in the locker room, on returning he finds a slip from a friend in his shoe. He quickly writes a return slip and puts in the shoes next to his. The Shaba"k struck again, they take the slip with the information on it. It is ironic that the inventor of these "slip of papers" trick was no other than the Deputy Head of the Shaba"k, David Ronen, many years ago. After he finished his service he was appointed to Security Chief of the Hahsharat Hayishuv Corporation headed by Mr. Nimrodi. When Mr. Nimrodi and his outfit came under investigation for various manipulation this same David Ronen became victim to this same "slip of papers" trick. The moral is you can never be too careful.

The polygraph/truth machine trick

The suspect proclaiming his innocence is offered a polygraph examination. This will clear his name. He jumps at the opportunity. He undergoes the examination, is asked some questions and then he is told that the polygraph determined that he is lying. The suspect is very upset, how can that be? Then the agent says "possibly something else you did in the past affected your nerves and the polygraph" and he makes him another offer, "write down the other thing you are worried about on a slip of paper, this will get it off your subconscious, and then we will repeat the test. The suspect accepts unaware that he is being filmed and that the slip he is writing on leaves a copy. Then he is charged with this other crime.

Remember! Polygraph results are not admissible as evidence in a Court of Law; therefore the polygraph can only complicate your case. Even if this time the polygraph indicates that you said the truth it doesn't follow that next time you will be as lucky. So, avoid the polygraph test at all cost, G-d tests our heart and kidneys and not the Shaba"k.

Lately it was published that in the terrible murder of the youngster Asaf Steirman by Roi Chorev and his friends, a different suspect was apprehended, one Yigal Lasri. Yigal agreed to a polygraph test, denied the murder, however the polygraph declared him a liar. The polygraph operator conjectured that Yigal was the main culprit, he led the murder group. Of course in time this all proved to be completely nonsense, Yigal was not involved in the crime at all.

The friends are squealing

The suspect under interrogation is led to the door of a room where his friend is being interrogated. He sees his friend conversing with the interrogators or making a diagram for them. The interrogators then tell the suspect that this friend of his already squealed on him, some very bad things so he better tell his part of it. Much later the suspect discovers that his friend was discussing the Rambam or the Beatles with his captors, he did squeal on him at all. Therefore, even if the suspect is convinced that his friend squealed on him, and even if that is true -- he must continue his silence, complete silence.

Starvation

The suspect is not given food, or is not given kosher food, for a whole day, then his captors condition the serving of food on his signing a receipt for the food. The suspect signs and his captors film him signing, now his captors have two options to use this film: they either show it to his friends and persuade them that the suspect has squealed on them, or they show it to the suspect himself and threaten to do the above, to persuade his friends that he squealed on them.

A newspaper

The suspect picks up a stray newspaper and reads in it that his colleagues confessed already and they are about to turn evidence against him. He is boiling mad, he will teach them a lesson, and he will preempt them and squeal on them. All this is happening at a time that his colleagues were not even arrested or did not confess to anything. There were cases where the Shaba"k employed known newscasters to falsify radio news reports involving the suspect. So, follow the golden rule, don't trust anyone, and keep absolutely silent.

Voice recordings

The prisoner is brought a voice recording as proof that his friends confessed and ratted on him. However this is a cooked, falsified recording. The prisoner falls into despair, he believes that his friends were broken and he also breaks down and admits to anything the Shaba"k agents feed him.

The police car trick

The suspect is taken together with his friend for an imprisonment extension hearing or just driven to a different jail. On the way there is a faked emergency stoppage, an accident, or a shooting. The agents jump out of the car and start handling the emergency while the prisoners are left in the car "alone". The suspects think this is a heaven- sent opportunity to compare their versions, unfortunately every word of their hasty talk is recorded and can be used against them. Incidentally, this trick is played with different props. For instance, two suspects are brought into a room for a meeting with their attorney. The attorney happens to be a little delayed, the suspects are recorded comparing their versions before the attorney arrives or after he departs. Thus, the Shaba"k did not transgress the attorney client relationship, but they got their scoop anyway.

Falsified evidence

The Shaba"k (also the police at rare occasions), can display to the suspect a falsified report of the crime scene. The report bears the suspect's fingerprints, or his A.N.A. They tell the suspect that they do not need his confession, the case against him is foolproof, and they are just trying to help him get a lesser sentence if he wants to come clean. The suspect, even if he relies on his memory will start having doubts about himself, he looses his confidence, his self-reliance is impaired and he becomes easy meat for the interrogators.

Friends accuse

The suspect is led to a room containing other prisoners, not necessarily from the same incident but of characteristics very similar to the suspect, for instance settlers etc. After some general conversation with the other prisoners they suddenly accuse the suspect, based on something he said, of cooperating with the interrogators and accuse him that he was put into the room just to spy on them. They start to shout at him and possibly punch him around a little. The suspect goes into panic. He wants to prove his loyalty to the cause and describes what he has done. This whole session is of course well staged, filmed and recorded, now it is ready for use against the suspect.

This rotten booklet

The Shaba"k investigators will wave a copy of this booklet in the suspect's face. They will laugh and ridicule it. They might say that following the instructions in this booklet will cause the suspect heaps of trouble, it will land in jail for a long time. This is the best proof that the booklet works, that the advice it contains helps the suspect overcome the dirty tricks of the interrogators.

The examples I brought above of the tricks the Shaba"k uses are only a foretaste. As I said the heaven is the limit, but they serve to illustrate the types of underhanded tricks they use to break you. They illustrate the importance of full awareness and caution because with the Shaba"k investigators it is all pre-planned, all the tricks have a purpose: to break you.

Again: Guard your mouth and tongue, save your soul from trouble.

Family support

The following words are dedicated to the prisoner's family and friends: if you will support your family member/friend in his difficult hours it will be easier for him to bear his imprisonment. In many cases the prisoner broke down and admitted even to crimes he did not commit just because he felt that the family was not behind him.

What constitutes support: coming to Court for every hearing, cheering him on, taking every opportunity to visit him, buying him some good candy, an encouraging smile, sending him the things he needs, especially reading material, etc.

When the prisoner feels that he has support, his wife and parents do not make mocking gestures at him, his friends cheer him, he can handle the interrogations much easier confident in their support, confident in his goals, knowing that the family cell will survive, and knowing that his place in his society is not in danger.

There is no doubt that the family of the prisoner suffers, but this should not be displayed to the arrested family member. He must not be rushed to make a deal and return to the family at any cost. If he feels that his wife can not manage he will lose heart and break down. The experienced investigators can spot weaknesses in the family relationship, they will use them to pressure the prisoner. They might say to the prisoner "you see what you are doing to your wife and children, come admit to the crimes we are accusing you of and we will go easy on you, admit for their sake", etc. If the family and friends will show their trust and support, will show that they can handle these travails, he too will handle them! He will have the power to bear these temporary troubles.

Conclusion

I fervently hope that this booklet helps our public. The booklet deals with many situations that await the suspect. However, as mentioned in the forward, there are many details and the booklet can not cover them all. Even after a careful reading there might be unforeseen situations not covered herein. In all doubts, even the most minute, the suspect should choose the stricter path; he must not be ashamed and seek advice. Above all he should choose the golden path of silence, absolute silence, listen, observe, but keep quiet! For that which was said can not be erased!

Articles to take with you in case of an initial arrest:

This is a sample of an interrogation memorandum of the interrogation of Yossi ben Baruch in the Shaba"k. The suspect has put into practice the rules of this booklet.

Memo # 1

From: Moshe date: May 7, 2002

Location: Compound Y-m start time: 2200

Interrogation memo of Yossi ben Baruch

1.        The suspect is unresponsive. He mumbles and shuts his eyes.

2.        I offered him drink and prepared him food but he did not respond. From time to time he raised hi eyes and looked at me, but no more.

3.        I tried to talk with the subject. I explained to him, in spite of his lack of reaction, that the case was finished, that we have confessions, and we know of his part in the affair. I told him that a denial in the case is worthless, that his behavior can only make matters worse for him in the future and be reckoned against him. The subject stayed quiet and motionless.

Notice: During the interrogation I was forced to leave the room on several occasions because of outside disturbances. The suspect was left alone in the room for several minutes and once for about thirty minutes.

End of interrogation: 0030 the next day

Present at interrogation: illegible signature

Memo # 2

From: Moshe date: May 9, 2002

Location: Compound Y-m start time: 20:50

Interrogation memo of Yossi ben Baruch

1.        Thus far the suspect has stayed unresponsive, he does not converse with his interrogators. I therefore approached him in his cell and asked him in Arabic for his name, he replied Yossi.

2.        Due to his behavior as described in 1 above I decided to try speak with him in his cell. I took along a jug of soft drink so I could offer him a drink.

3.        I tried to converse with him in his cell but he remained unresponsive, he also refused to drink with me.

Notice: During my stay in his cell, when I poured him a light drink the drink spilled on his clothes. I offered him some paper towels and suggested he change his clothes. The subject stayed unresponsive.

End of interrogation: 21:05

Present at interrogation: illegible signature

"HASHKEM YISRAEL-WAKE UP ISRAEL"

AND TAKE CONTROL OF OUR DESTINY

Copyright © HASHKEM, A California Corporation 2007

Page last updated 05 Tammuz 5767 - 15 June 2007