The affair of Atzili, Micah and the minors continues to stir up the world of football, after an investigation published by News 13 (Network) at the end of last week revealed disturbing correspondence, which revealed that drugs and alcohol were involved in the case. As I recall, the connections of Maccabi Haifa and Hapoel Beer Sheva claimed a lack of authenticity in the messages that were revealed.
The case happened about two years ago and the case, as I recall, was closed. Tonight (Monday) the attorney general Yehudit Leiva who closed the case, was interviewed by Guy Peleg on News 12 (Keshet) and said: “A very difficult picture emerged from this case, in which two celebrities invite two minors, solely to have sexual contact. There is harm to women, humiliation and humiliation here. Why was the case closed? It is necessary to distinguish between the moral, value, social question and the law. At the end of the day, there was no dispute as to the basic elements of the offense, there is no dispute between the minors and the suspects. The minors told the suspects that they were 17.5 years old. All along the way the minors also told their surroundings. From all angles in the picture that was revealed to me, the suspects knew that they were 17.5 years old.”
Did the footballers turn a blind eye? “What does closing one’s eyes mean? I suspect and refrained from asking. The two suspects did not stop trying to find out. They inquired in front of them – ‘How old are you?’ Again and again, before, during and after the meeting. He (Azili) does not turn a blind eye, but suspects and inquires. Why did the minors give false information about their age? This question came up, what I can say is that the minors gave information, I don’t want to say they lied, this Childish behavior, they raised their age to be close to the point of sexual contact with the celebrities, they were afraid that if they knew the real age, they would not want to be with them.”
Regarding the closing of the case on the delivery of alcohol to a minor for lack of public interest, she said: “There is no dispute that there was alcohol in Micah’s house and there is no dispute that they consumed alcohol. But what? The supply of alcohol to a minor is up to the age of 18. According to the ads of the two suspects, they are 17.5 years old, which means that it is a gap of Half a year regarding the formation of the offense. When I take the gap of six months and, on the other hand, the point that they were suspected of a much more serious offense, on grounds prohibited by consent (five years) and the original offense was dismissed as not guilty. On this balance, I thought it was inappropriate to prosecute them for supplying alcohol.” .
Leiva added: “We must be careful and make a difference between the law and the moral concept, they failed a very serious moral failure. I can say that there are countries in the world where this power gap, between celebrities and minors, under the age of 18 would have been a more serious offense and the case would not have been dismissed. The legislator said His word – between the ages of 14 and 16, it requires awareness of age and therefore there is no offense.
Did the players express remorse in the investigation? “They did not express remorse, even when they learned that they were under 16, when they were asked ‘Aren’t you sorry?’ They presented a victim position that the minors made their lives miserable, therefore a social sanction is needed. What happened following the exposure on the networks and a police investigation, the girls were insulted and slandered, probably by fans of the two footballers and they did not raise a finger to stop the repeated harm to these girls. There should be a statement: when they were given The opportunity to express regret, they did not use it.
“I claim that there is a very disgraceful exploitation here, although I closed the case legally, but at the same time in the margins of my opinion I referred to the moral and value aspect. I recommended that the prosecutor’s office address this aspect when it closes the case. What is the role of the prosecutor’s office? We are lawyers, innocence, thank you and goodbye Or to come out with a value statement. Some thought differently than me, so it is not expressed in the sense of the value damage.
“I think that the statements that are heard are a bit confusing between the moral and the values stain. I also think that the publications that have been made now, which go back to the correspondence written between the two suspects and try to give them a different interpretation – I think that this is also an act that should not be done, because it is to present an image that goes beyond its broad context and in fact To charge them with criminal charges when they have no criminal charges.”
Regarding the allegations about the drugs, she added: “The answer is unequivocally no, this powder, I saw that it was published – it was checked and this publication was simply taken out of context. They were asked about this powder and they also gave an explanation: it is a powder they consume for health needs like many men consume for gyms. In their correspondence, they talked about maybe the girls using drugs, but this connection made between the powder they were talking about and the matter of their talking about drug use, was separated.
“In their investigation, they gave a version about drugs and about the powder. More than that, they said: ‘We are footballers, we don’t use drugs, we don’t have drugs!’ The issue of the powder came up, was investigated, they gave a version, when this version is on the face of it logical. When we talk about drugs, the basic requirement is that some kind of drug residue be found there, that the minors say that there was some drug use, in their quote at most it is about the intention of a plan, you can’t accuse someone of drugs just based on a plan.”