The Israeli Prisons Authority prevents family visits from the poet Dareen Tatour

(This article was also published in Hebrew. An edited version of it appeared today in +972.)

On the morning of August 8, we accompanied the poet Dareen Tatour to the detention center in Jalameh (Kishon), where she had to report to undergo a “screening” to determine where she would spend the remaining two months out of the five-month prison sentence imposed on her. The next day we learned that she had been sent to Damoun Prison, to be in the special ward for Palestinian “security” women prisoners.

Damon_prison from Wikipedia

Damoun prison on Mount Carmel (from Wikipedia) – old damp buildings

Despite the harsh conditions in which “security” prisoners are held, staying with them is preferable for a prisoner like Dareen. The solidarity between the prisoners and the fact that this is a population that is not part of a “delinquent” marginal culture are more important than all the difficult physical conditions and restrictions of basic rights. However, by the standards of the Prisons Authority, her classification as a “security” prisoner constitutes a green light for abuse and denial of her basic human rights, even if all she is actually accused of is publishing a poem.

The women “security” prisoners (as all Palestinian “security” prisoners) have no right to a telephone, no access to a social worker that may help to handle sensitive personal problems and there is no rehabilitation process to prepare them for life after prison. Even the meeting with the lawyer representing them is not an open meeting but through a glass partition. Any “security” prisoner, even one accused of writing a poem, is considered, a priori, according to the apartheid system of the Israeli prisons system, more dangerous than any violent rapist or criminal murderer, and has less basic rights in prison.

Damoun Prison on Mount Carmel is located in damp buildings in a place that served as a tobacco warehouse for the Palestinian Karaman family before 1948. In 2000 the Israel Prisons Authority admitted that the prison was not suitable for human habitation and closed it. However, shortly after the outbreak of the second intifada in the same year, Damoun was reopened as a prison for incarcerating “illegal aliens” – the Palestinian “bread prisoners” who risk their lives and freedom by crossing the Apartheid walls that surround the Occupied West Bank in search for work. Later on, more Palestinian prisoners were brought to Damoun, including a new special section for female prisoners.

On Monday, August 27, I visited Dareen’s family in their home in Reineh (near Nazareth) to ask what they knew about her conditions in prison.

Dareens father Tawfiq Tatour (Abu Yamen) -at home

Dareen’s father Tawfiq Tatour (Abu Yamen) at the family’s home in Reineh

When Dareen separated from the escorts and entered the iron gate of the detention center, her father, Tawfiq Tatour (Abu Yamen), entered with her, along with a bag of clothes she had prepared in advance. Now he continued the story of the abuse of Dareen and the family from the moment of her entry to the detention center with this clothes’ bag. After Dareen was taken away, the guards told him to wait until they check the bag. After a long wait, perhaps an hour or so, they returned the bag full and swollen. He doesn’t know what was entered, or if anything was allowed in from all the clothes she packed.

The difficulties in bringing clothes to prisoners are a well-known and widely used form of abuse during the interrogation period. The father recounted how, after Dareen’s arrest, taken from her home in the middle of the night without any extra clothes, she spent many days under interrogation before the family was allowed to bring in clothes. But now, as she entered prison in a planned and orderly way after being sentenced, you wouldn’t expect that there would be such a problem. All the more so since Dareen was already familiar with the prison’s rules and packed exactly those clothes that prisoners are allowed to hold. No need to say that the bag with her clothes was returned without any explanation.

Visits to the “security” prisoner, the family was informed, can only be arranged by fax. They should submit the visitors’ names and wait for approval. In any case, for “security” prisoners only first-degree relatives might apply for permission to visit. Dareen’s father told me how he sent a request for a visit and received a negative answer: “She does not deserve a visit.” Again, no explanation was given. Several additional requests were not answered at all.

Dareens Cat named Cadi waiting impatiently

Dareen’s cat “Cadi” is waiting impatiently for her release

Last Wednesday, August 22, at the time of the families visits at Damoun, the father went to the prison, even though he knew he could not visit Dareen, hoping, at least, to be allowed to deliver some clothes. The guard at the gate refused his request. When he requested to speak with the responsible officer the guard refused and he remained behind a locked gate.

Prior to the publication of this article, we sent some questions to the Israeli Prison Service for their response. They stated that “according to the Prisons Service Ordinance, it is permitted to authorize visits to convicted prisoners at the end of three months from the day they enter the prison.” Lawyers who know the subject closely from their daily work told me that this is not the usual practice and that visits usually start about two weeks after the start of the sentence. But even if we take the words of the Israeli Prison Service as they said, Dareen was already in prison for more than three months at the beginning of her detention before being transferred to house arrest. Do they start counting the three months every time from scratch?

Advertisements

Adam goes alone to a demo

You can ask yourself: At what age did you, for the first time, go to a demonstration to which your parents objected? When Adam first did it he was under five years old. And he was not drawn to it by some older friends.

Adam in the garage - February 1996

Independent minded Adam, February 1996

It was in 1996. On January 5, Israel assassinated a legendary Palestinian guerilla, Yahya Ayyash, in Beit Lahiya near Gaza. Hamas militants revenged his death with a series of suicide bombings. One of them, on March 4, killed 13 pedestrians near Dizengoff Center at the middle of Tel Aviv.

At that time the Oslo accord between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (signed in 1993) was still new, and many people held the illusion that the Israel’s leadership really wants peace and is ready to bring an end to the occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Some Arab activists in Haifa decided to make a vigil protesting the revenge bombing. They wanted to show the Israeli public that the local Arab Palestinians support peace and denounce the killing of civilians.

I never thought it was a good idea to demonstrate against activities of the Palestinian resistance, no matter how much you agree with or abhor any specific action. First, the demand by Israeli authorities and public opinion from Palestinians to always apologize for actions of the resistance is part of a systematic witch hunt that holds every Palestinian responsible. Second, we always demonstrate against those who hold power, as demonstrations are an expression of the power of the masses against the misrule of the elite. And finally, for any act of Palestinian resistance, violent or peaceful, Israel’s mighty oppression machine exerts a disproportional revenge against the Palestinian masses as a whole. Giving moral support to this repressive apparatus may only exacerbate the suffering of the innocents.

Baby Adam in a demonstration

At the age of four and a half, he already had a long experience with demonstrations

When friends came to our house to invite us to take part in the vigil, which they planned to hold in the small half-deserted commercial center of Halisa, near our home, I didn’t want to argue with them. It was not a long time since I was arrested by the Israeli police for taking part in a demonstration against Israel’s war crimes. So I laughed and said: “You have seen what happened to me last time when I went to a demonstration. I don’t want to be arrested again…”

Young Adam was present and heard the invitation and my cynical refusal. He already had a long experience in demonstrations, which he used to attend with his parents, from the first year of his life. He was shocked by the bloodshed and felt it was a just cause. So he told us: “I want to go to the demonstration!”

At the designated time, Adam went out of the house and walked to the Halisa commercial center. At a safe distance, so that I will not be encouraging Adam, neither intervening in his independent move, I walked after him. I stood on the other side of the street during the demonstration, to keep an eye on the brave independent minded little demonstrator.

 

‘Rebellion of Silence’: New Work by Poet-on-trial Dareen Tatour

Today, October 11, 2017, Poet #DareenTatour is already 2 years imprisoned for a poem…

ArabLit

Today marks two years since Dareen Tatour was arrested, the case against her built against a poem she’d posted on social medial. Jewish Voices for Peace has launched a new video marking these two years, and Andrew Leber has translated one of Tatour’s new poems.

After two years of imprisonment, house arrest, and different stages of her trial, Tatour awaits the verdict, set to be announced on October 17, 2017, in the court in Nazareth.

Rebellion of Silence

By Dareen Tatour

Trans. Andrew Leber

Before my body was torn to pieces

How naïve was I!

I would want to fly,

Fall love with poetry,

Devote myself to love,

Dream of a table to call my own…

Yet after light forced its way in

With the laughter of dawn,

I fell silent –

Filled with anger –

As dreams were dashed,

And the silence broken,

And the flames consumed me!

They…

View original post 477 more words

‘A Poet’s Hallucinations,’ by Dareen Tatour

ArabLit

Dareen Tatour’s “A Poet’s Hallucinations,” translated by Jonathan Wright, comes ahead of PEN America’s planned month of solidarity with Tatour, who was first arrested in October 2015, charged with incitement to violence primarily over a poem (translated to English here), and has been in jail and on house arrest since.

The verdict in Tatour’s trial is currently set for October 17 at noon in the Nazareth court. By this time, the poet will be exactly two years and a week in detention.

You can follow the course of her trial at freedareentatour.org/trial.

  1. The Desire Hallucination

Desire builds a nest

Between the branches of my love.

It sings like a bulbul, night and day

And sweeps through me like fire through straw.

It tears my eyes from my face

And disfigures my features.

It steals all the furniture in my soul

So I sit and lament my luck.

  1. The…

View original post 385 more words

A New Translation of Palestinian Poet Dareen Tatour’s ‘I… Who Am I?’

The wonderful people of ArabLit are doing a great job to help the solidarity campaign to release Palestinian poet Dareen Tatour – Thanks you!

ArabLit

On August 30, despite public threats to withdraw funding from Israeli Minister of Culture Miri Regev and Minister of Finance Moshe Kahlon, poets, writers, and readers gathered in Yaffa to hold a solidarity event with Dareen Tatour, who was first arrested in October 2015, charged with incitement to violence primarily over a poem (translated to English here), and has been in jail and on house arrest since:

From the solidarity event in Yaffa. Photo: Arab48.

The solidarity event, according to a report in Arab48, included both poetry readings and a discussion of Tatour’s legal case by lawyers and activists. Tatour’s father was also there to thank those in attendance. According to multiple reports, both Regev and Kahlon threatened to use their power to defund the theatre in Yaffa that held the event.

Several US literary figures also renewed their calls for Tatour’s freedom.

As to the next step in…

View original post 402 more words

Some breathing space in Dareen Tatour’s house detention

As we went out of the crowded courtroom of judge Margalit in Nazareth, we were all smiles. The tense waiting for the judge’s decision gave way to hugging and bursts of laughter. It is astonishing how happy you can be for such a little victory. After all, Dareen Tatour will soon finish her second year in detention for writing a perfectly legitimate protest poem, and within a few months she is expected to be sentenced and there is a real danger that she will be sent for another period in prison.Dareen celebrating victory 3 supervisors

But this was the time to celebrate a small victory. I couldn’t avoid the comparison with the much larger recent victory of the struggle of the Palestinian people that forced the Israeli occupation to remove the new harassing “security” arrangements from around the Al-Aqsa mosque. Cold headed analysts summed it at “the magnetometers went out, the occupation is here to stay”. But still it was a big victory to popular struggle and it showed that there is some limit to the power of evil. It was rightly celebrated on the street of Jerusalem as an important step on the way to liberty.

Time has many dimensions

Whenever Dareen Tatour requests for relief in the conditions of her detention, the prosecution and judges pretend to know nothing about the constant delays in their courts, and claim that the trial is going to end so soon that any change will be just unnecessary burden on the system. Last time, on May 22, when the judge allowed Dareen to go out of the house between 9am and 7pm, she said she assumes this is the last request for relief. But she limited Dareen by stating that she can’t go out of the house unless accompanied at every moment by one of her 5 certified “supervisors” – her parents, two brothers and a sister in law. The official reasoning was that, as Dareen is prevented from any access to the internet, there should be somebody to watch her at any moment to make sure that she doesn’t touch a smartphone or a computer. At the occasion she also added a new condition that prevents Dareen from attending any political gathering and demanded an upfront payment of another 6,000 shekel on top of all the previous bails. (A detailed report in Hebrew).

Dareen_consulting_Lawyer_Haya

Consulting advocate Haya Abu Warda

But this “solution” created a new problem. Four of the five “supervisors” are working every day, and Dareen’s mother is busy caring for a bunch of her small grandchildren while their parents are at work. So Dareen could hardly enjoy her promised new freedom and is still forced to stay in the house all day long. The real solution was to let Dareen free, at least until the end of the trial, which is the case of many violent criminals in Israeli courts. But, knowing the hard stance of the prosecution in this particular case, three of the women that accompany Dareen in her ordeal volunteered to provide a practical partial solution by asking to be certified as supervisors in order to enable Dareen get out of her house more frequently.

The request to add the three new supervisors was presented by Dareen’s lawyers to the court, which requested them to get the position of the prosecution before setting a hearing. The prosecution first didn’t reply, then said they are ready to allow only two new supervisors, and finally, after dragging the issue for about two months, refused to accept any new supervisors. Finally the court set the date to hear the plea for August 1st, at 9am.

Luck and Reason

On that morning judge Margalit was on rotating duty to hear all the coming detention cases. The courtroom was full, as well as the waiting hall. After he finished sending a poor (blonde Jewish) women for 3 months in jail for “refusing to obey a legal order” and “disrupting a policeman’s work”, he freed himself to serve the many groups of prosecutors, lawyers, detainees and family members that were flocking the room. We readied ourselves for a long wait, but were surprised to hear the name Dareen Tatour coming first – maybe it is our lucky day.

The prosecution was represented by lawyer Ruba Abu Dakka, whom we didn’t see on this case before, probably also in rotating duty while others are on holidays. The judge, who is used to release all types of suspects, including hardened criminals, on a daily basis, and to certify all types of “supervisors”, asked the prosecutor whether there can be an agreement. She said no. So he brought in the proposed supervisors for interrogation, one by one.

Dareen_Haya_Edith_Bilha

Left to right: Edith, Haya, Dareen, Bilha

The first to be interrogated was Ofra Yeshua Lyth from Yaffa (Jaffa). She told the judge that she knows Dareen from the days that she was under house detention in Kiryat Ono, near Tel Aviv, and that she used to drive Dareen to the court hearings. When asked whether she can come from Yaffa to take care of Dareen in faraway Reineh, she explained that last Friday she did just this – but in addition to taking Dareen for a trip she had to take her father with them as a certified guardian, making him miss another work-day. And here she is today in the Nazareth court again at 9am…

In the “counter interrogation” the prosecutor tried to deter her, telling her that the trial may last many more months, and asking whether she will be able to supervise Dareen over all this period… As if she doesn’t understand that adding more supervisors will make the task easier for all and the new supervisor-friends get the “privilege” to be allowed to take Dareen with them out of the house and not an obligation to do it every day.

The judge was curious and asked a special question “in the name of the court”. Are you a member of some association or a political party? Ofra was happy to answer that she is a member of an association called “I’m an Israeli” that tried to convince the Israeli authorities to declare a unified “Israeli nationality” for all the state’s citizens. They even appealed to the Israeli high court, but their appeal was rejected. The judge seemed satisfied to be able to put the whole case in some political category and asked (not to the protocol) whether all the three candidates belong to the same association.

Finally the prosecutor asked Ofra what she will do in case she would have to go to some political gathering… Ofra promised that she will not take Dareen with her.

Anti-Climax

As Ofra was interrogated the other two volunteers, Bilha Golan and Edith Breslauer, had to wait outside, not to be exposed to the secrets of the interrogation unless their replies will lose authenticity. But even the most foolish confrontation make you tired, and each of the next two interrogations became shorter.

They centered on the main technicalities that are always part of the interrogation of bailers… Do you know what Dareen is accused of? Do you know what limitations are imposed on her? What will you do if she will try to look at the internet? Will you not hesitate to call the police? Are you ready to sign a fiscal guarantee?

Answering the question about what Dareen is accused of gave a rare opportunity to get out of the regular script. Edith said she knows that Dareen is on trial because she wrote some post on Facebook that was misinterpreted. She added that she read Dareen’s poem and doesn’t think it justifies her house detention.

After everything went just perfect, the judge asked the prosecutor again whether there can be an agreed decision… She wanted to call her superiors and went out. After some time she came back and told the judge she has no answer yet. This was too much for the judge that thought the answers in his court come from him. So he let the two sides summarize their positions.

Lawyer Abu Dakka tried to justify the prosecution’s refusenik position. As she didn’t find any reason to object to the new supervisors, she made herself as if she is defending the decision of the previous judge on May 22. She said this decision already made the correct balance between the need to safeguard state security against the danger that Dareen Tatour constitutes and Dareen’s right to freedom. She didn’t mention, of course, that on May 22 the prosecution also objected strongly to letting Dareen to get out of her house for more than 2 hours daily, in the name of the same fake danger to the public.

Victory_Dareen_and_Lawyer_Haya

Celebrating victory with lawyer Haya Abu Warda

Advocate Haya Abu Warda reminded the court that with the current supervisors Dareen can’t use even the limited freedom that was promised to her in the previous decision. The judge agreed to add the three new supervisors as requested.

(There is a somewhat different report about the same events in Hebrew in Haifa Ha-Hofshit.)

Updates about the trial

In the meantime, the prosecutor has already presented her written 34 pages summary, which repeats and stresses furiously all the original accusations. She even claims that the big differences between the translation of the poem that was done by an unqualified policeman and the professional translation presented by the defense prove that the defense’s translation is not reliable!

Now advocate Gaby Lasky is working on her summaries to disprove all the prosecution’s lies and distortions… It will not be ready before September and the trial will probably not be finished before Dareen will complete her second year of detention on October 11… (For regular updates about the trial check here.)

Solidarity

Keep the date: On August 30 supporters of Dareen Tatour and Freedom of Expression are planning a special solidarity night in Yaffa with a rich artistic program.

We hope more solidarity work will be organized locally and worldwide as the trial is approaching its critical stage toward the verdict.

In the meantime we set up a small Free Dareen Tatour site with updates about the case, in addition to our Facebook page.

And we are still collecting donations to cover the legal expenses.

 

The prosecution in the poet’s trial tries to cause the court addiction to snuff films

(This report was initially published in Hebrew)

The court hearing in the case “The State of Israel v. Palestinian Poet Dareen Tatour“, held on Tuesday, March 28, was meant to be short, even boring. Only one defense witness remained and his testimony was intended to be purely technical. Since the parties will submit the summaries in writing, and each side will be given about a month to write them, we expected that, following this hearing, Judge Adi Bambiliya-Einstein will set the next hearing in two and a half or three months time.

Finally, we watched a tense legal drama with original artistic elements.

The claim of discrimination in enforcement

The last witness on behalf of the defense was a policeman – Chief Inspector Yaniv Hami – who is responsible in the Israeli police for answering public requests in the context of freedom of information.

Break in the trial - March 28

Break in the hearing, March 28, 2017

One of the defense arguments in this case is the claim of discrimination in enforcement: while the network is full of severe and violent incitement against the Palestinian Arab residents of Israel, the police and the State Prosecutor’s Office prefer to investigate and prosecute almost only Arabs, even for relatively moderate publications. In the early stages of the trial, the attorney at the time, Abed Fahoum, asked the judge to instruct the police and the state prosecutor to provide him with relevant statistical data so that he could substantiate his claim. The judge refused the request on the grounds that there was not even a shred of evidence of discriminatory enforcement.

The current defense lawyers, Gaby Lasky and Nery Ramati, have found a way around this obstacle. It turned out that in June 2016, the “Negev Coexistence Forum” submitted a request under the Freedom of Information Act to receive data about investigations, arrests and indictments for offenses involving incitement on social networks. The police’s reply was given to the applicants in August 2016 by Chief Inspector Hami, and he was now summoned to deliver it as a defense document in Tatour’s case.

At the time, John Brown and Noam Rotem covered the police data as received in a long (Hebrew) article in “Local Call” under the headline “Police data: dozens of indictments against Arabs for incitement, zero against Jews.”

Attorney Ramati gave in advance to the prosecution the data that he had received from the coexistence forum, but it turned out that the data brought by Inspector Hami to the court was organized in a different manner. The prosecutor, Alina Hardak, claimed that the defense had misled her and attempted to provide the court with data that is not backed by the testimony of the witness. “No,” explained Ramati. All he asks for is to submit to the court the data that the witness brought as he brought it. The prosecutor had to agree. The data that was actually submitted wasn’t seen by the parties prior to its submission, and they will be able to study the details only after the printed pages will be scanned into the court’s file. The witness also couldn’t answer most questions, since the reports were produced by a statistician on behalf of the police, and he only mediated their transfer to the public.

The prosecution wins another month of detention for the poet

At the end of the Inspector’s testimony, Attorney Ramati said: “These are my witnesses”. With this ended the defense’s case. We expected that the timetable for the summaries and the verdict would be set, but the prosecutor drew a surprise. She asked to summon another witness, attorney Hussam Maw’ed, who advised Tatour in the first days after her arrest.

Waiting for the trial

Waiting for the trial to begin

Here we return to October 11, 2015. At 3:00 before dawn, a special force of the Nazareth police, accompanied by Border Police, surrounded Tatour’s house, woke up her family and took her to detention and interrogation. We learned something about the traumatic experience through the testimony of one of the policemen who interrogated Tatour on the day of her arrest. He asked her whether she was religious. When asked by the defense why he asked this question, he replied that she did not wear a headscarf while in the pictures on her Facebook page her hair was covered. She explained that the policemen who took her did not even let her finish dressing.

She described the sequel in her testimony in court. She was held in a car in the police yard while police officers passing by called her a “terrorist” and cursed her. At 5:40 am she was brought for the first interrogation but refused to answer questions before consulting a lawyer. At 9 am she was brought back for interrogation after consulting attorney Hussam Maw’ed. The investigation was conducted before the police examined the material on the computer and the phone that had been confiscated from Tatour, and the investigator charged her with many offences, most of which do not appear in the indictment that was filed later. Tatour denied all that had been attributed to her. In later interrogations, the interrogators presented Tatour with the materials they found on her computer and phone. She admitted publishing them and explained in detail her intent behind each publication.

When Tatour testified in November 2016, she was asked by the prosecutor why she “lied” during the interrogation on the first day of her arrest. She explained that in her meeting with the lawyer he told her that she was in serious trouble, that she could be sentenced to seven years in prison, and advised her to deny everything. At this stage it was not clear to the police or to Tatour what the charges against her were. It is hard to guess what the lawyer could understand at the time from the frightened and confused detainee, and what he did actually advised her. I would doubt that he would even remember, more than a year and a half later, the details of their conversation.

The prosecutor is now demanding that attorney Maw’ed will be brought as a witness on behalf of the prosecution in order to refute Tatour’s testimony regarding the advice he gave her.

Attorney Ramati was surprised by the unusual step taken by the prosecution to bring a lawyer to testify against his client. He objected sharply to summoning the witness. He requested to submit his objection in writing, even the next day, so that it could be properly explained. But the Judge told him that if he will not explain his objection now, she will oblige him to appear in the courtroom on the next morning. Finally Ramati explained that his objection was not on specific legal claims, but on an ethical basis, as bringing lawyers to testify against their clients constitutes a serious violation of the ability to maintain trust and allow honest consultation. Alternatively, Ramati requested that even if attorney Maw’ed would be brought to testify, it would be limited to what Tatour said in court regarding their consultation.

The judge approved the prosecutor’s request to summon the witness, refused to limit his testimony, and set a special session on April 27 at 12:00. This means that the trial will last for another month, as will the house detention and the denial of Tatour’s freedom.

Telling Films

We had already intended to go home when the prosecutor reminded everybody that she wanted to submit to the court three videos that were shown to the defense witness, Dr. Yoni Mendel, during cross-examination (in the previous court hearing).

What the prosecutor actually brought with her, in order to add to the evidence, was a sheet of paper with links to the YouTube videos and a burned disc with a text file containing links to allow the judge to play the videos.

Attorney Ramati fiercely objected to submitting the links to the videos and claimed that whoever uploaded the films to the site could have also changed their contents since.

Sometimes, when you can’t watch the movie itself, you can at least hear the story. In one famous example, the prisoners in the famous movie “Kiss of the Spider Woman” spent their time telling films.

In the previous trial session, the videos were presented to the witness from a laptop placed at the edge of the judge’s desk while the prosecutor and the defense attorneys were standing next to him. We as a crowd were disregarded and saw nothing. This time, through the argument about the acceptability of the films as evidence, we were rewarded with listening to a summary of the films’ stories not once but in three different versions, from the defense attorney, the prosecutor and the judge.

The version brought by the defense counsel was the most detailed. He recalled that the first two videos were presented to the witness (which was summoned as an expert translator) as a sort of spontaneous examination of his competence. All that was recorded in the protocol were fragments of translated sentences from what was written and said in the videos. Since the judge doesn’t know Arabic, it is clear that watching the videos will not help her formulate a learned opinion about his ability as a translator.

Therefore, the prosecution’s insistence on submitting the videos can only be construed as an attempt to introduce new content that will strengthen the prosecution case and bias the court against the defendant, bypassing all the due procedures for presenting evidence in a criminal trial. The videos were not neutral material for testing translation. In one video, a Palestinian man announced his intention to carry out an attack in Tel Aviv and to be a Shahid. The second video is called “the lovers of the stabbings” and shows the picture of Hadeel al-Hashlamoun, who is mentioned in Tatour’s poet, among the pictures of perpetrators of attacks.

Regarding the third video, a section of it was presented to the witness and he was requested to describe what he saw. He replied that he saw stone throwing and another round of the violence from both sides. Now the defense attorney made it clear to us what the prosecutor was looking for in the video: In one scene a car was seen running over three boys. Attorney Ramati said that the video was known to him as a case in which a settler ran over Palestinian youths, but he quickly explained that his testimony on the matter, as well as the prosecutor’s opinion, can’t be accepted by the court as evidence about the content of the video. The prosecutor wanted to prove that, just as the witness did not express sufficient shock at the Palestinian violence in the video, he also ignored the (non-existent) violence in Tatour’s poetry…

The prosecutor insisted on the importance of the court watching again the videos in order to understand the context of Dr. Mendel’s testimony. She even suggested that the court should watch the films with the defense attorney at this hearing to ensure that nothing has changed since they were presented in court at the previous session. The defense refused.

The most violent version we heard, albeit in an abstract form, was the depictions of the plots that the judge told. Unfortunately, like most of the judge’s remarks, these were not recorded in the minutes. She explained to the defense attorney that if, for example, the film showed how cats’ heads were smashed, but the witness called the film “playing with cats,” this indicates the witness’s approach.

Involving the audience in the plot

In modern plays they sometimes make the audience participate in the play.

During the debate about the ability to change a YouTube video after it was published, the prosecutor claimed to know for sure that a published film can’t be changed without changing its link. The defense attorney explained that he thinks differently, but added that he is not an expert, just as the prosecutor can’t testify as an expert on the subject. I passed him a note saying that I have a YouTube channel and that I usually edit films after they are published. He suggested bringing on the spot a witness with experience in publishing and editing videos on YouTube.

Finally, the judge decided that, since she can’t decide the factual question of whether it is possible to edit videos after they are posted on YouTube, she will not accept the links at this stage. It was the first victory in the Sisyphean struggle of the defense in a trial in which the prosecution had already crossed many red lines and reached delusional realms.