Court convicts former website employee of hacking

Former head of Kol Al Arab found guilty of sabotaging online rival Asunara as part of plea bargain.

November 1, 2012 05:29
1 minute read.
Hacking [illustrative]

Man with computer 370. (photo credit: REUTERS/Thomas Peter)


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again

The Nazareth District Court on Wednesday convicted Nimare Suleiman, formerly head of information for the website Kol Al Arab, of illegally hacking into the computers and website of a competitor.

The conviction was part of a plea bargain in which Suleiman admitted that he had hacked into the email accounts of workers at competitor Asunara.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.

Suleiman only admitted to the crimes of an amended indictment that had reduced the severity of the charges he was accused of, which had included other actions of sabotage against the competitor.

The plea bargain also stipulated that Suleiman withdrew his earlier denials of guilt and that he must meet with a court-approved evaluative expert to help determine what punishment would be recommended to the court.

In light of the fact that the punishment would be at least somewhat dependent on the expert recommendations, which have not yet been made, the court explained to Suleiman that he could potentially withdraw from the plea bargain.

The outstanding issue appeared to be that the state prosecutor wanted a conviction with imprisonment, although he was not opposed to him serving his time through community service.

Presuming the expert and the court both endorse the idea of serving the sentence through community service, Suleiman would likely stick to the plea bargain, whereas he might reverse the deal if the court insists that the plea bargain would lead to imprisonment.

Courts, in principle, are not bound by state prosecutors’s plea bargains, but rarely contradict them.

Related Content

Holland Park’s forest, north of Eilat.
August 11, 2014
Promising trend of prosecution for environmental crimes, officials say