Katsav accuser's friend: I heard former president harassing her
Friend: Katsav called endlessly, made threats; Mazuz: Taking rape off indictment was not without reason.
By Haaretz ServiceA close friend of A., the first woman to accuse former president Moshe Katsav of rape and other sexual offenses, told Channel 2 on Thursday that she had heard Katsav harassing her friend and threatening her.
Katsav last week signed a plea agreement sparing him rape charges after at least 10 women had accused him of sexual harassment and rape over the last year.
The friend said in a televised interview Thursday that A., who then worked at the President's Residence, had come to her apartment in Tel Aviv several times, when she "needed to escape her space."
"In those days she would receive endless phone calls" the friend recounted, saying that Katsav used to shout during those calls, so that she could easily recognize his voice and hear every word spoken.
"He would scream 'get back here, get back here, I will make your life miserable, you hear me?'" the friend said.
She added that the sheer number of calls shocked her and she asked A. about it later. A. responded "he's crazy, he loves me, he's not normal, let it go," the friend said.
After A. told her about the alleged sexual attacks she had suffered, her friend inquired why she hadn't said anything when it began. According to the friend, A. replied that she believed it would stop and "she didn't want to believe it was happening to her." A. even feared for her life saying "if anything happens to me, at least you will know," the friend said.
Katsav's defense team issued a response to these statements, saying the State Prosecutor's Office did not believe A.'s story or those of her friends.
Earlier Thursday, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz submitted to the High Court of Justice his reply to petitions seeking to reverse the plea agreement he had granted the former president. In his reply he wrote though he had in January released a draft indictment with much harsher crimes than Katsav was ultimately charged with, he had not changed his mind on a whim. "This was not an acrobatic flip or a U-turn move." He explained that the new evidence submitted during Katsav's last hearing eroded his previous stance, to indict for rape, and diminished the weight of the original evidence.
Earlier Thursday, the High Court of Justice removed the gag order on the details of A.'s petition to the court, which was filed against the plea bargain reached with former president Moshe Katsav.
Details from the petition reveal that Katsav confidant Uri Yoeli met A. and asked her to be the president's lover.
A. maintains in the petition that she got up from the table in disgust after speaking with Yoeli, said that the offer insults her and left the premises. In another situation, A. entered Katsav's office to return a book, and he pressed against her without her cooperation. She maintains she felt paralyzed and that her life was in danger that same day.
A. also asked in her petition that Mazuz explain why he didn't list sexual attacks in his indictment against Katsav, which she claims happened between 2003-2004.
Last weekm, A. had asked the court to consider prohibiting the publication of the petition, citing the right to privacy and possible damage to the former president and his family.
Mazuz maintains that only the name of the complainant should be kept secret, but emphasized that public interests demand the petition be released so that the public may be exposed to the foundations of the plea bargain.
In the petitions filed at the High Court by civil rights and women's organizations, it was argued that the court must nullify the plea bargain "because of the extreme absence of reason, the damage to the public interest ... and the damage to the principle of equality before the law." The petitioners point to the fact that the attorney general had considered "the conviction of the president on more serious charges likely" but nonetheless "exercised stricter judgment and conditioned the indictment on having a secure outcome or on the near certainty of a conviction."
After a Haaretz request that Mazuz release the original draft of the indictment, in which more serious charges against Katsav are included, was denied, the Movement for Freedom of Information (MFI) filed a similar request with the Justice Ministry.
"There is no clearer example than this for the need of public supervision over the activities of the public prosecution," said Roi Peled, director of MFI. "It is sad that the attorney general has avoided to date giving a detailed explanation for his decision, but he must understand that the public prosecution is not immune to public supervision. If the prosecution is unwilling to reveal the suspicions against Katsav in court, it must at least present them to the public."
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Goes to Katsav's wife for staying with him. The rest of us have just gotten rid of him - true, he should have gone to trial...but at least we are done with him. She's stuck with him until she stops being a fool - leave him high and dry, like Yitzchak Mordechai was. That's the only way to teach men like this.
The word for that is Slander. Keep it up and someone might sue you and put your name in the paper. The shield you stand behind while accusing people only extends so far.
You wrote: In this case will he be able to become President again?... Here's the answer: NO - not in this case and not if there was no case. The Presidential position is a one time thing - for 7 years. It can not be repeated. ... but if it could do you think any sane person in Israel would want this man to be our president? Katzav is not remotely innocent. He is, in fact, pleading guilty. He has an amazingly strong legal team and absolutely no reason to take a plea agreement if he were innocent. For the record, plea agreements are offered when the evidence is strong enough to pretty much guarantee a conviction. The agreement saves state money on a trial and allows the guilty to negotiate the best possible deal. I only wish he had received a sentence in keeping with his horendous crime.
"A" has received a monstrous blackening from Katsav's supporters and legal team. This has been given due publicity by Haaretz. I think it only fair that "A" should be allowed to defend herself, and her friends add credence to her story, and, of course, that Haaretz should report this too. From the tone of your message, Boozaglow, it sounds as though you are yet another apologist for the dirty old toad, Katsav, and are irritated at Haaretz for weakening your campaign of character assassination of "A". By the way - do you think the ex-President should now withdraw his plea bargain? It's a question I ask all his supporters. Curiously, they all fall silent at this point.
Haaretz is loosing its cool. Chanel 2 or any Chanelhave the occasion to feel in the time slot with all sorts of sensational stories: it does not add credit to the Station, but for Haaretz who wants to consider itself as a reliable and responsible newspaper, beyond the pale of Yellow Journalism, raises some questions. In first place it carried the torch of Judge and exucoter of the Former President, which as we know now had a many judicial quandries.
"Details from the petition reveal that Katsav confidant Uri Yoeli met A. and asked her to be the president's lover." So Katsav got his mate, Uri Yoeli, to try to pimp for him. I suppose this is essential when you're a repulsive old toad. And still she said no....
Time to indict the duo for influencing a legal proceeding by manipulating with statements against the defendant public opinion from their official position as government employees.
That dirty old man, playing on the mysogenistic ``Jewish values``of a significant section of our population,is attempting to make the victims involved into the culprits with some degree of success. Let`s recognise the age of enlightenment and have some real justice
Mr. Mazuz is pulling all the old tricks out of his bag. First you threaten heavyweight charges, then you get the defendant to negotiate. You drop the more serious charges and get the defendant to "admit" other charges. Then you leak evidence and annoy the complainants so they go the Courts. Hopefully you then get the plea bargain annulled. Of course it is not your fault, the Court did it. Where does that leave the defendant? In this case will he be able to become President again? Will he be able to explain away why he agreed to the plea bargain although he really denies all these ridiculous allegations?