Olmert lawyers: Ex-PM did not meet with Duchner

Defense attorneys campaign to have state drop all Holyland charges because Olmert was abroad during time of meeting.

March 6, 2013 02:08
2 minute read.
The Holyland Tower in Jerusalem

The Holyland Tower in Jerusalem 370. (photo credit: Marc Israel Sellem/The Jerusalem Post)


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


Former prime minister Ehud Olmert was in the US at the time the state’s main witness in the Holyland trial, Shmuel Duchner, said the two met in Jerusalem and Olmert asked him for a bribe, according to a statement by Olmert’s legal team on Tuesday.

The bribe involved Duchner giving Olmert’s brother, Yossi, NIS 500,000. If true, the contradiction would be compounded by the fact that the evidence Olmert is presenting is taken from the state’s case against him in the Rishon Tours Affair, important evidence which it may have overlooked.

The Holyland trial is a case against Olmert and fifteen other defendants for bribery and fraud relating to smoothing over legal and zoning violations for the Holyland project in Jerusalem.

Olmert’s legal team took the unusual step of releasing the evidence to the press prior to even presenting it in court.

Usually, lawyers prefer to surprise witnesses in court with such evidence before making it public.

However, since Duchner – known as S.D. under a previous gag order – cannot be surprised, having died on Friday from chronic health issues, and the defense attorneys are campaigning to pressure the state into dropping the charges against their clients, they made the evidence public.

In past hearings, Duchner had testified and presented his notes showing that he had met with Olmert on October 3, 2002, and Olmert had asked for the bribe to help his brother, who was in serious debt.

Duchner had even been pressed about whether he was sure about the date of the meeting – and he vehemently stuck to his story.

However, in the state’s case against Olmert in the Rishon Tours Affair, part of the Jerusalem corruption trial, the state had argued that Olmert double-billed a ticket to fly to the US on October 1, 2002, in the amount of $5,658.

In addition to this claim and the evidence the state presented regarding the flight, Olmert’s defense team has an official document showing Olmert did not return to Israel until October 5, 2002.

If correct, the evidence would prove that Olmert and Duchner could not have met on October 3, 2002, and according to the defense, would also prove that Duchner made up the meeting and wrote false notes to himself to support his false story.

It is noteworthy that under questioning, Duchner admitted that the document he gave the state was a photocopy and not an original.

That does not confirm the document was falsified, but it does raise some questions in and of itself about the document’s veracity.

Amir Dan, Olmert’s spokesman, slammed the prosecution, saying the evidence “proves the lack of seriousness with which the prosecution collected its evidence, that they did not even check details that were in their hands and were known to them.”

Dan added that this evidence was just another example of “lying and falsifications by the state’s witness exposed in the court proceeding.”

The state did not respond, generally preferring to respond to such issues only in court.

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

August 31, 2014
Rioting resumes throughout east Jerusalem Saturday night