Supreme Court flips murder into manslaughter for man who killed his rapist

Yonatan Hillo had been convicted of murdering Yaron Ayalin in 2010 and given a 20-year sentence by the Lod District Court in 2013.

May 31, 2016 20:26
1 minute read.
Crime scene [illustrative]

Crime scene [illustrative]. (photo credit: INGIMAGE)


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 analysis 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


In a precedent-setting decision, the Supreme Court on Tuesday converted a 20-year jail sentence for murder into a 12-year sentence for manslaughter for a man who smashed the skull of his rapist.

Yonatan Hillo was previously convicted of murdering Yaron Ayalin in 2010 and was given a 20-year sentence by the Lod District Court in 2013, despite the court’s acknowledging that Hillo was raped by Ayalin, who also had a record of sexual violence.

The Supreme Court’s three-justice- panel – Hanan Melcer, Daphna Barak-Erez and Uri Shoham – reduced the typical murder sentence from life in prison to 20 years in prison.

The decision set off anger and debate over the harsh treatment that Hillo, an Ethiopian Jew, was getting, considered the extreme provocation he had experienced.

Hillo’s lawyer claimed self-defense and pushed for a full acquittal, saying that when Hillo killed Ayalin, he believed his victim was taking him to an isolated spot in order to rape him for the third time.

While not fully exonerating him, the Supreme Court in large part agreed that Hillo faced extenuating circumstances.

The justices, however, did not accept the argument that Hillo was acting in self-defense.

The court said he had alternatives to avoid being raped besides murder.

Noting the brutality with which Hillo treated Ayalin’s body after he was clearly dead, the court said that it did not want to endorse revenge as a justification for murder by giving a full acquittal.

On the other hand, despite Hillo strangling Ayalin to death and his treatment of the body, the Supreme Court found that the case fit the extreme circumstance where provocation could reduce a murder charge.

In decades past, provocation was often regarded as being able to reduce murder to manslaughter, the classic case being for a man who killed another man after finding him in the act of having an affair with his wife.

But in recent decades, provocation has been nearly eliminated, making the Supreme Court’s decision all the more significant.

Join Jerusalem Post Premium Plus now for just $5 and upgrade your experience with an ads-free website and exclusive content. Click here>>

Related Content

Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman talks with Saudi Arabia's King Salman bin Abdulaziz
March 25, 2019
Middle East watching how Israel handles Gaza