The police and Shin Bet security service have arrested a third man suspected of taking part in the throwing of an incendiary device into a Jaffa home, which caused serious injuries to a 12-year-old boy.
The Magistrates’ Court in Tel Aviv gave its permission to release this information on Wednesday after a request made by Haaretz. Like the first two suspects, the third man arrested is also suspected of attempted murder and arson with an intent to kill another person, as well as another crime, the nature of which is under a gag order.
After Gaza, an Israeli-Palestinian struggle for identity: Aluf Benn, Noa Landau and Anshel Pfeffer
The court extended the detention of the man until next Sunday, on which a hearing will be held regarding the extension of the arrest of the other two suspects, who are brothers. The state has not allowed the three suspects to meet with their lawyers out of concern that this would disrupt the investigation.
Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg approved on Tuesday a request by the state to prevent one of the brothers from meeting with his lawyer before Wednesday. A lower court had forbidden this based on the man’s mental state. Prohibiting a suspect from meeting a lawyer is an unusual step, usually taken in investigations of politically-motivated crimes. The Shin Bet official overseeing the investigation can approve this for up to 10 days. Following that, special permission by the Attorney General is required.
The first suspect is an Arab resident of Jaffa, whose name cannot be disclosed for now. He was interrogated several times by the Shin Bet, with the request to prevent him from meeting a lawyer stemming from fears that the investigation would be disrupted if such a meeting took place, foiling the arrest of further suspects. The suspect’s lawyer claimed at the District Court hearing that there is no such concern, since the second suspect is the man’s brother.
At the District Court hearing, held on Monday, Justice Benny Sagi ruled that the ban on the suspect’s meeting with a lawyer should be lifted due to the man’s mental state, but Supreme Court Justice Sohlberg overruled this, saying that the man’s mental state was looked into and was found to not carry much weight under the circumstances. He ruled that the meeting with the lawyer should still be forbidden.