Did guards commit sodomy against detainee at Sdei Teiman? – analysis

There are all kinds of side political and operational issues surrounding the arrest of 10 soldiers who were prison guards at the IDF’s makeshift Sdei Teiman detention facility for allegedly sodomizing a Palestinian detainee there.

But the central question is: did the guards sodomize the detainee or not? If they did, putting aside how much Israelis of all political affiliations despise any Palestinians involved in violence or terror against Israel, both Israeli and international law are very clear that the guards will need to be punished.

What the punishment would be depends on what they are convicted of, and there are all kinds of extenuating circumstances that can be explored in a trial that can lessen the severity of a crime or a sentence.

Hebron shooter Elor Azaria was convicted of a reduced manslaughter charge and ended up serving less than a year in prison for killing a neutralized Palestinian terrorist.

The second most important question is whether the High Court of Justice will soon force a complete closure of the Sdei Teiman facility, or whether they will allow it to remain open in a reduced capacity, given that the vast majority of detainees have already been transferred to more standard prison facilities.

Back to the first main issue: there have been contrary reports about what the medical reports say regarding the detainee. Some reports have said that the medical reports unequivocally support the allegations that he was sodomized via his rectum. Other reports have said that the medical reports on that specific allegation leave open the possibility of him having been sodomized, but also leave open other possibilities that could be used by the suspects to argue the evidence cannot support a beyond a reasonable doubt conviction.

Prosecution confident of winning

The Jerusalem Post understands that the prosecution is very confident of winning on this point and, to date, the IDF pretrial court has consistently ruled in their favor to repeatedly extend the detention of the key suspects.

Another area of ambiguity is who is responsible for what. Ten guards were originally arrested. Two were quickly released, and three more were released some days later after their detention was initially extended by an IDF pretrial court.

It seems that those three may still face some lesser charges. Regarding the five still in detention, it seems that two may have central culpability for the alleged offenses, while the others may have some additional culpability beyond the earlier released arrested guards, but still less than the top two. The Post has learned, however, that all five are likely to be accused of being involved in some way with the sodomy attack.

Also, there have been leaks that the two central suspects failed polygraph questions about whether they had perpetrated sodomy. This is not a good sign for them, but polygraphs are also not considered strong evidence in criminal trials. The Post understands that this is more being used by prosecutors as a helpful guide point for how to conduct the pre-indictment investigation than any expectation of using the polygraph to win at trial.  

Self-defense incidents don’t usually last 10 minutes 

Possibly the largest problem for the two most central suspects and the three other suspects still under arrest are leaks that the central incident lasted for around 10 minutes.

If this is true, it will be very difficult for them to argue that they were acting in self-defense or that they were temporarily confused or provoked and did not have criminal intent.

A short 45-second video leaked to Channel 12 seemed to present the actions against the detainee as carefully planned, including concealing the worst actions from video cameras in the area, though because the actions were concealed, they do not necessarily prove the sodomy charge on their own.

But by putting together the video evidence with medical report evidence and possibly with some incriminating evidence from the prison guards themselves or their commanders, the case so far looks strong.

Certainly, the IDF pretrial court has made increasingly definitive statements about the evidence against the main suspects in the case.

The sodomy case is far from the only case relating to Sdei Teiman.

Already weeks ago, a separate indictment was filed against a single prison guard for beating a different detainee while transferring the detainee to and from the interrogation rooms.

In that case, there is video evidence of the beatings, and the soldier’s commanders turned him in.

Further, there are expected to be much later cases against prison guards relating to the deaths of around 27 detainees while in custody.

On July 19, the Post exclusively reported that IDF Military Advocate General Yifat Tomer Yerushalmi would point out that two complications with trying to speed up the Sdei Teiman cases are that some detainees were badly wounded on the battlefield and died in Sdei Teiman, but likely of their wounds.

She hopes she can move forward faster in cases of detainees who came to Sdei Teiman fully healthy and only later were wounded or died.

Delays in medical evaluations 

However, even with those cases, the Post reported that the IDF legal division is facing a massive delay in receiving professional medical opinions regarding injuries or the cause of death.

For example, was death caused for a specific detainee by strangulation, a series of blows to the body, or a heart attack?

The Post reported that the state medical forensics institute has been overwhelmed in trying to advance all of these questions since October 7 and the depressing and unprecedented volume of work has decimated the staff size just as the IDF legal division is growing to try to keep up with the war.

As an example of delay, regarding one soldier who committed suicide, it took around seven to eight months to get a medical opinion.

The Post clarified on Thursday that despite the additional public attention now focused on the Sdei Teiman cases, there has been no breakthrough to move the forensics institute process faster as compared to where things stood at the time of the Post’s July 19 report.

Returning to the broader issue of how long Sdei Teiman will remain open, the state reported to the High Coirt of Justice on Wednesday that only around 30 detainees remain at the facility out of around 1,400 which were being held there prior to June 5.

Already on June 5, the state had told the court that 700 detainees had been transferred and that another 500 would be transferred within a few weeks.

Despite the progress, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel continued to push the court to order an immediate shut down of the facility.

ACRI contended that the state’s own comments on Wednesday made it clear that new detainees could still be brought to Sdei Teiman.

Further, ACRI said that the allegations of detainees being held there on their knees in crowded cages, handcuffed and blindfolded all day, and subject to humiliating treatment, along with the many cases turning into criminal probes, meant that the state should no longer be given the benefit of the doubt.

In contrast, the justices seemed to want to give the state credit for transferring the vast majority of detainees and wanted to give the state until early September, when the state said more remaining detainees would be transferred and the facility might be able to be closed.

The High Court did not clarify whether it would issue an order before early September.