I have looked over the court document on Zalman Cohen,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/101795852/Zalman-Cohen-Court-Document-Nachlaot-Pedophilia-Case-11-2011 and in summary:
1. This court document is from an intermediate stage of the court proceedings. It is after the indictments occurred, but before the end of the trials. That is, none of the suspects mentioned in the document have been convicted yet, as the document makes clear.
2. There were only three children whose evidence was found to be believable enough to be considered by the prosecution:
- A girl whose name starts with "Dalet" (D.), born 4/2003, who was interrogated in the summer of 2011 at the age of 8, about events occurring in 2009, two years before that when she was approximately 5 years old;
- A boy whose name starts with "Yud" (Y.), born 9/2001, who was interrogated in the summer of 2011 at the age of almost 10 about events occurring in 2010, when he was about 9 years old. He was the oldest of the children testifying;
- A girl whose name starts with "Shin" (S.), born 5/2002, who was interrogated in the summer of 2011 at the age of 9, about events occurring in 2010, when she was about 8 years old.
3. None of the children are old enough to give testimony in a court of law. The evidence that was presented consisted of written transcripts of taped sessions which were held with expert child interrogators. Therefore neither the lawyers for the defense nor the prosecution have any opportunity to call the children as witnesses and further clarify the evidence by means of cross-examination.
4. No physical evidence was presented. As far as I know, physical examinations of the children were not conducted.
5. There were many inherent inconsistencies and puzzles about the evidence given by each of the children. However, the judge still felt the evidence was worthy of in-depth consideration and should not just be simply thrown out because of the inconsistencies.
6. Regarding the evidence from "Dalet" (D.):
- Her first interrogation was on Wednesday, August 10, 2011. It was the day after Tisha B'Av. It dealt primary with acts done by other suspects.
- Only in a very advanced stage of the investigation did D. mention that Zalman Cohen was also present in the place "but he only looked" and did not do anything.
- During that interrogation, she described Zalman Cohen as someone who appeared Chareidi, but it was as if he was wearing a costume.
- During her second interrogation, D. contradicted her previous statement in which she said that Zalman Cohen was present in the place "but he only looked". This time she said that he told her and the other children to undress.
- On September 19, 2011, a picture of Zalman was shown to her. She said that it appeared to be Zalman, and that "he looks really Chareidi". That contradicted her previous description of her identification of Zalman as someone who appeared to be Chareidi, but that was because he was wearing a costume.
- When asked how she identifies that it's Zalman Cohen, D. says she does so by his Chareidi clothing and his face.
- The judge states at the end of the section about D's evidence, that we are dealing with a child of 8 at the time of the investigation, who is reporting events that happened to her at the age of 5.
7. Regarding the evidence from "Yud" (Y.):
- His first interrogation was on Thursday, August 11, 2011. It was two days after Tisha B'Av. He spoke about "someone who lives on the bridge above", but did not identify the person by name as being Zalman Cohen.
- He stated that the man who lives on the bridge had told him and a girl to undress, to touch each other's genitals, and for the boy to lie on the girl. All of this was stated to be about a year and a half before the time of the investigation. He also said that a month before that, he had been at the same man's house (who lives on bridge above) with his two brothers, and the man told him to undress. The man touched his genitals giving him a hard pinch. The man gave Y. a slap and caught him by the leg to stop him from leaving . Afterwards he told him to dress and go. These things were said immediately at the beginning of the investigation, and Y. said: "That's the whole story".
- Afterwards, Y. described despicable acts, including sodomy, that were done to him, in another person's house by other people.
- At the second interrogation on August 18, 2011, Y. stated immediately at the start of the investigation that he knows the name of the man on who lives on the bridge, and it's Zalman Cohen. He said his friend, who has also been by you (in other words, a friend who has also been questioned by the same interrogator), told him that was what he was called. (Clearly the children are talking to the other children about the various names and events, as the child himself openly stated.)
- During that second interrogation, Y. stated that many children were in the house of a different suspect, and each boy was paired with a girl. He said the man who lives on the bridge, Zalman Cohen, told him and the girl to touch each other's genitals. He said the girl was lying on top of him. When asked to describe his feelings when she was lying on top of him, Y. said he had trouble breathing because he was lying on his belly. But when asked to describe the girl's genitals, which Y. said he had seen and touched, he described them like the genitals of any boy, and said they were "like those of any man". (Note: I don't know if anyone caught this point. It seems clear the boy did not really see a girl's genitals if he said that. But it also seems clear that he did not ever see a man's genitals if he said that a boy's genitals look the same as a man's genitals.)
- During that second interrogation, Y. again described the incident in which he said he went to Zalman Cohen's house with his two brothers, in which Zalman Cohen told Y. to undress. There had been another two children already there, who were undressed. Zalman Cohen told Y. to undress, and when he refused, Zalman slapped him twice and afterwards threw him down. Meanwhile Zalman Cohen told the other two children to get dressed and go. Zalman Cohen went out for a half hour and came back, and told Y. to get dressed and go. Y. did not mention at all about touching each other's genitals that he had described in the first investigation. He did so only after the investigator reminded him about it. Y. then said that he had touched the man's genitals quickly, but the man wanted more. The man pinched his genitals a long time.
- When Y. was requested to describe the house of Zalman Cohen, he didn't mention the possibility of going up to a second floor. And he mentioned that there was a bed in the house. But, according to the description which was photographed in the search done by the police, it was possible to see that on the first floor there was no bed at all, and a bed is found only on the second floor, which has the bedrooms. The first floor includes a kitchen, the salon, and bathrooms (including a bathtub). The judge notes that the investigators never considered the possibility of whether at any stage there had been a bed on the first floor of Zalman Cohen's house.
- On September 18, 2011, Y. was investigated regarding sexual molestation done to him by others, and after the investigation identified photographs of Zalman Cohen, and an additional man.
8. Regarding the evidence from "Shin" (S.):
- Her first interrogation was on Sunday, July 31, 2011. It was the 29th of the month of Tammuz. SHE DENIED ANY SEXUAL MOLESTATION.
- The second interrogation was on Monday, September 19, 2011. It was the 19th of the month of Elul. Now she described being touched by another man in that other man's house.
- Only in the third interrogation, on September 20, 2011, does S. mention Zalman Cohen for the first time. She said that Zalman told her to lie down in a bathtub naked, and that he had a stick which he hit her with, and told her to hit him with the stick also. She said he sat or laid down on top of her on top of the stick. The judge makes note in the court document, that the way in which S. describes the events in the bathtub with Zalman Cohen is identical to the way in which she described the events in the bathtub with the other man at the other man's house, previously. (It should also be noted that the judge indicated that the description of the bathtub event sounded physically impossible.)
- S. is able to describe the inside of Zalman Cohen's house accurately, as having a second floor. The judge puts much weight on this and thinks that it does prove the girl must have been in Zalman Cohen's house. (I would like to note that one of the main mothers who was in the vanguard of pursuing the Nachlaot Pedophile Ring had been in Zalman Cohen's house when it was occupied by its previous owners and would know accurately how to describe it as having a staircase, and an upstairs area (i.e. a Galeria), etc. And that family also has a Galeria built in their house. The man that built the Galeria in Zalman Cohen's house for the previous owner also built a Galeria for several other apartments in the Chareidi area of Nachlaot. Also, another woman who is currently very actively chasing down the suspected "pedophiles" was in Zalman Cohen's house very frequently when the previous owners lived there.)
- S. was able to identify Zalman Cohen's picture as well as that of another man.
9. In the judge's discussion of the children's evidence, she notes that the prosecution emphasized that they had behaved cautiously and out of tens of children who were investigated, they only took the three most reliable. It was known to the prosecution that the residents of the neighborhood had performed private investigations and that evidence had become contaminated by conversations of children between themselves, as well as conversations of children with their parents and other adults. Much of the evidence seemed contradictory, but the judge felt that it was still substantial. The main reasons that the judge felt the evidence had any validity was that: 1) the girl S. was able to describe the inside of Zalman Cohen's apartment. (Note: Many people in the neighborhood had been in Zalman Cohen's apartment when the previous owner lived there and could easily have told their children that it had a Galeria.) 2) the boy Y. said he met Zalman Cohen because Zalman Cohen took care of the willow trees in the neighborhood, and Zalman Cohen acknowledged that he took care of the willow trees in the neighborhood. (Note: Anyone who lived in the neighborhood would have known that Zalman Cohen took care of the willow trees! It doesn't prove that any of the children actually went to his house.) The judge felt that since those details of the children's testimony were reliable, therefore she could feel that there was enough validity to their testimony to consider it seriously.
10. The judge had decided that, in spite of the all the evidence presented by the children, that Zalman was not a danger to society and therefore could be placed under house arrest.
In conclusion, I would like to also add some of my own observations on this matter:
A. Although I lived in the neighborhood many years, I never saw that Zalman and the other two ever had anything to do with each other.
B. I never noticed (and nobody I know ever noticed) any large gatherings at the apt. of any of the accused as decribed in the children's testimonies.
C. The boy Y. had stated that there were several adults (the 3 men who were indicted, plus others who were not indicted), and many boys and girls who had been paired up and sent to different rooms in the apartment of another one of the indicted men. No mention is made of the size and number of rooms in the apartment of the other suspect, and whether this was likely to be possible. That man had a small apartment with only two rooms.
D. The judge mentioned that Zalman's son said that someone had stolen his (the son's) portable computer from the house. The judge raised the question about whether this was really true, or whether Zalman had purposely caused the computer to disappear from the house so the police couldn't take it as evidence. I personally know that the son made a big effort to get his computer back. It was an extremely expensive computer (I think 14,000sh) that he needed for what he was doing. He was extremely upset that someone had stolen it. His efforts went on for 2 weeks and at the time, it was assumed that the local vigilantes took it.
E. It is interesting to note that one of the ladies that was instrumental in having Zalman Cohen arrested last year (in 2011) was very good friends with Zalman's ex-wife. Over 7 years ago, that lady had warned us about Zalman and said that we needed to be careful with our kid(s), based on things that Zalman's ex-wife was telling her. At that time (over 7 years ago), Zalman's ex-wife was trying to have Zalman prosecuted for sodomizing his 2 younger sons, and did not succeed to have him convicted..
F. It is also interesting to note that another one of the ladies that has been instrumental in spreading the accusations of child molestation in Nachlaot claims to have been raped by Zalman 9 years ago and even states herself in her many comments on various blogs that she has been after him ever since to get him put away in prison.
