‘Supreme Court was divided on Olmert retrial’

The Supreme Court had been divided and in the process of figuring out how to break their disagreement about whether to grant the state’s earlier request appealing Olmert’s acquittal.

By
June 17, 2014 03:40
1 minute read.
Olmert

Olmert in court on day of sentencing, May 13. (photo credit: POOL)

 
X

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

An expanded five justice panel of the Supreme Court presided over by Supreme Court President Asher D. Grunis on Monday heard the state’s motion for a retrial over former prime minister Ehud Olmert’s acquittal in the Talansky Affair.

In an incredible moment of candor, Justice Yoram Danziger essentially told the parties that from the moment the state had filed its motion, the Supreme Court had been divided and in the process of figuring out how to break their disagreement about whether to grant the state’s earlier request appealing Olmert’s acquittal.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


The retrial motion would essentially freeze the appeal before the Supreme Court and send the case back to the Jerusalem District Court which acquitted Olmert in July 2012.

The state defended the extraordinary request of a retrial (despite the verdict being almost two years old), noting that if ever there was a case to allow such a request, it was this case, allegedly with newly discovered tape recordings of Olmert pressuring former top aide Shula Zaken not to cooperate with the state.

Olmert’s lawyer, Eli Zohar, doubled down, saying that the tapes, in and of themselves, were not a silver bullet and would require Zaken to testify at trial.

He added that getting an impermissible second chance at Zaken testifying against Olmert after the verdict was the real and hidden purpose of the state’s motion.

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

Riot
August 31, 2014
Rioting resumes throughout east Jerusalem Saturday night

By DANIEL K. EISENBUD