5 View the gallery
Charlie Three and the fighters who neutralized the terrorist from the attack at the Nablus Gate
(Photo: Police spokeswoman)
The issue of opening fire on fighters is controversial in the Israeli public and occasionally makes headlines, when there are terrorist attacks in which terrorists aim to hit, were neutralized and shot to death. The issue came up again following last week’s stabbing attack, in which two Border Police fighters neutralized the terrorist and shot him to death.
Police Commissioner Superintendent Yaakov Shabtai asked to expedite the investigation of the incident and gave full backing to the fighters while mentioning the incident with Charlie Three which led to a change in the opening fire procedures. “So who is the same Charlie Three who brought about a change in the procedure for opening fire on terrorists? What does his family think? Are brain investigations?” “Are there any justifications on the subject? And is there room for change?
5 View the gallery
Kobi Shabtai, documentation of the terrorist’s attack and knife
(Photo: Police Spokeswoman Elad Gershgoren)
Charlie Three, the same fighter mentioned by the Commissioner of Police, enlisted in the police force in 1986 and was trained as a fighter and saboteur in the YMCA. Three heard shouts in the Baka neighborhood of Jerusalem, and he took to the streets and came across Amer Abu Sarhan, an Arab terrorist armed with a knife who escaped after murdering soldier Iris Azoulay and Eli Altrez. A struggle ensued, during which Abu Sarhan managed to stab the three to death.
The death of three sparked an ongoing debate on the issue of opening fire regulations. These instructions have changed, and the attack has been studied in the IDF and the Israel Police as an example of the fact that in cases where there is a terrorist with means and purpose, he must be shot in order to kill.
5 View the gallery
Moses Three, Charlie’s brother. “If the procedures were different, Charlie would be alive”
Moshe Shelush, (62) Charlie’s older brother, said in a conversation with Ynet that if he had opened fire procedures then it would have been like today, he would still be alive. “My brother’s case is a borderline case of lack of subtleties in the matter of a suspicious arrest procedure and of opening fire procedures. My brother paid with his life, in the most expensive thing because of an unclear and illogical procedure. In the past there were restrictions on opening fire. The terrorist is threatening your life, you can shoot in the air or in the legs.In real time it is difficult to conduct this procedure, but Charlie was afraid to deviate from the procedures and make a mistake.I shot the terrorist but in a moment of inattention, the terrorist moved his body aside and stabbed him. The procedures were different, Charlie was alive today because he was a skilled fighter and had no operational problem. ”
Three resents the fact that DIP interrogated the fighters and argues that they should be given a free hand. “It is difficult to judge this situation and the procedure must be clear because we are at war. Soldiers should be given freedom and not suppressed the motivation to eliminate terrorists who come to harm them. My brother paid with his life so that no such cases would happen after him. “We need to let the fighters act and not mess with the small things because it costs us our lives, and on the other hand the terrorists are using these procedures to harm.”
The fighters who neutralized the terrorist from the attack at the Nablus gate are recovering
(Photo: Police spokeswoman)
Former retired commissioner Assaf Hefetz believes it is mandatory to investigate a case in which a person was shot to death, but claims that in any case, the fighters came out without guilt. Once there is a questionable issue, the correct guideline is to research and check. At first, it may not be investigated under a warning, but DIP should check what happened and this is a safer approach to avoid situations that are on the border, and I do not actually see the investigation as a problem. ”
At the time of the case in which Charlie Three was murdered, Hefetz had served as police commissioner and he remembers the incident well and claims that the hesitation of three, led to his death. “Charlie hesitated in his response to the terrorist instead of shooting him straight and killing him. The terrorist took the opportunity, attacked him and stabbed him. The hesitation is what gave the terrorist time to act. It is unlikely that a YMCA fighter would allow anyone to approach him. He hesitated perhaps thinking he was not endangering him and he gave him a chance to hurt him. “If Charlie had shot the terrorist and not hesitated, he would be alive today.”
Documentation: The stabbing attack at the Nablus Gate; The terrorist was neutralized
(Photo: Police spokeswoman )
According to him, the lesson from that case is that when there is a fear that a terrorist will come to harm, he is killed immediately. “The instructions to the fighters are to eliminate in order not to create a space time that will allow the terrorist to carry out his plot. This is the main lesson from the story of Charlie Three who hesitated for half a second. Based on that case, when you train fighters in such situations Even when you shoot in front of targets and when you do fire-free exercises. Educate the police officer and create the reflex for him that in case someone comes to kill, you need to eliminate him as soon as possible. Harm”.
“Once there is a life-threatening situation, fire should be opened,” says Hefetz. “Opening fire should be as soon as you feel danger to you or the people who need to be protected.” In such situations, the investigation will be in his favor, because even if there is a concern that the same fighter was not in danger, it is a subjective decision on the ground and can not be appealed. “To create a situation where the police officers are afraid to use the weapon when they identify or think there is a danger. Therefore, in both training and the command that prepares the people for battle, they must be trained and trained that the discretion is theirs and then the law protects them.”
5 View the gallery
Former Commissioner Hefetz
(Photo: Dana Kopel)
An object suggests incorporating an intermediate stage prior to interrogation so as not to deter fighters from acting when in danger. “It may be necessary to do some intermediate stage of operational investigation. DIP interrogates the incident and examines what happened, but in my opinion, in order to be on the right side of the picture, Mahash needs to make sure that the incident is a faultless event.”
Retired David Tzur, who served as the commander of the IDF and the border commander, also remembers the case of three well. “The late Charlie entered the incident unaware of what had happened before. He saw a situation of a man holding a large knife redeemed with blood and he did not know that he had slaughtered two people before. He ran after him and shouted at him to stop and shoot in the air. He finished the incident and when he bent down to turn it over, the terrorist stabbed him once in the chest and penetrated his ribs into the heart and Charlie died within a minute. ‘
“One of the lessons from this incident in the context of the attack is that if you are in a situation where a person approaches with a knife, there is no time to react,” says Zur. “The risk when there are means of intent, the speed at which the terrorist can approach you, is high and you will not be able to react so you should react immediately and not to shoot or neutralize the shot, but to shoot and neutralize quickly. “But in a situation where there is a knife and an intention to hit, shoot directly at the center to neutralize the threat.”
He said that wherever there is a shooting and someone is killed, an investigation should automatically be opened, but it may be worth considering conducting an operational investigation before an investigation is opened. “Field inspection was sufficient in this case and taking the weapon was unnecessary, but not too much damage was done here because the system responded well and this investigation ended very quickly, and they returned the weapon and today announced the closure of the case from innocence. Overall the system worked quickly.” .
5 View the gallery
“It is also clear to DIP that in such cases it is likely that the case will be closed out of innocence.” Eran Shender
(Photo: Alex Kolomoisky)
“It could happen that fighters on the ground would be afraid to act if the system did not back them up so quickly,” Zur adds. “All the statements that fighters are afraid to act on because of the case of Elor Azaria are detached from reality. There is always the terror of DIP overhead, and on the other hand we do not want fighters to lose a human photographer, we want them to act according to procedures. In the field and keeping the rules. ”
Former State Attorney Eran Shender and the person who set up the Department of Police Investigations also believe that there is justification for opening an investigation after a terrorist attack in which the terrorist was shot dead. “When a person is killed, and the video shows him lying on the ground, the fighters’ version should be accepted knowing that in a sequence of shots fired in these circumstances, the case is likely to be closed through innocence. It is also clear to DIP investigators. “The case will be closed out of innocence.”
According to him, the case of Charlie Three is not the same as the case of the attack on Saturday. “Three was a skilled fighter and he did not notice the knife carried by the terrorist. He thought he could neutralize it on his own. If he had shot him, no one would have complained. He did not shoot not because he feared the consequences of the shooting, but because he thought he would take over himself and not ”
Shender claims that DIP investigations into the terrorist attacks do not bother the fighters on the ground from acting in times of danger. “Once there is an opening fire that takes a life, it is appropriate to accept the shooters’ version and find out that they acted properly, otherwise the slope is very steep and we will be sorry for it. “.
.