Netanyahu finally gets to speak directly to the judges - analysis

Since his public corruption trial's first hearing in May 2020, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has shown up a couple dozen times, mostly remaining quiet, voicing an occasional satirical remark, or evincing a condescending smirk here or there toward his opponents. 

But Tuesday was the first day that he got to speak directly to the three judges who would decide his legal and political fate (if they convict him of a crime with moral turpitude, he would need to resign) and give his personal side of the story.

This is more significant in many ways than his many public speeches attacking the police, the prosecution, and the courts. 

Those speeches have succeeded at turning around half of the country against the legal establishment and the other half even more against him than they had already been, but have not necessarily impacted the score regarding how these three judges will rule.

Cold and methodical

While it is hard to imagine in our over-tribalized and polarized society, most judges, especially on a specific trial, look at the evidence before them in a cold and methodical fashion.

To date, the judges have issued dozens of rulings in favor of the prosecution as well as in favor of the defense.

They suggested a plea deal in June 2023 which would have included dropping the bribery charge from Case 4000, closing Case 2000 entirely, and then having Netanyahu agree to a plea deal with a minor conviction in Case 1000 and possibly also in 4000. The bottom-line of such a deal would have been a win for the prosecution by convicting a sitting prime minister, but also a win for Netanyahu because he probably would have been able to continue in office and face no jail time.

Seems like a pretty middle of the road even-handed bench.

But with no deal, this evenhanded group may eventually need to issue a ruling on all of the cases based on the evidence, and while that ruling might end up looking like their plea deal, it could also end up being much more one-sided for one party or another.

In that sense, the prosecution has mostly had the upper hand until now.

They spent the majority of three years telling their side of the allegations against Netanyahu with innumerable witnesses covering all three cases against him.

Some witnesses hit Netanyahu exactly where the prosecution wanted like: Nir Hefetz, Hadas Klein, Ilan Yeshua, and Avi Berger.

Others, like David Shimron and Arnon Milchin, were forced against their will to give damaging testimony against Netanyahu.

Still, others like Shlomo Filber, found ways to both hurt, but also help Netanyahu, and left holes in the prosecution case even before the defense started its true attack. Much of those and other holes, the defense achieved using cross-examination against prosecution witnesses.

These holes were enough to influence the judges to press the prosecution for a deal even without hearing the defense's case.

But the prosecution still controlled the ball and pace of the game.

Tuesday, saw Netanyahu the spin master at his best.

Whether he was engaging his inner policy wonk side discussing his achievements versus Iran and with Israel's hi-tech economy or whether he was giving a masterful dissection of trends and subtrends within the Israeli media, it was his room.

The judges at a few points cautioned his lawyer, Amit Hadad, to keep some of his answers shorter and more focused on the criminal charges, but mostly they let Netanyahu pontificate and run down his punch list of points to make.

There were at least two clear points where he turned more intensively toward the judges and half begged and half threatened them that they should make all of this go away because putting him on trial for trying to fight back against a media hopelessly (in his view) biased against him was "an ocean of absurdity."

You could tell that he was speaking from his own heart in those moments and feel the anger and embarrassment that he has and is going through to fight these charges.

This will be a powerful combination that will be hard for the judges to ignore and will be most of the show for the next month or so.

But then will come cross-examination.

Prosecutor Yonatan Tadmor, who faced down former prime minister Ehud Olmert on cross-examination, in his trial around a decade ago, is back along with the feisty and seemingly fearless Yehudit Tirosh.

There is little question that they will throw Netanyahu off of his game and trap him into saying some things which will harm his case.

The question then will be what the judges end up valuing more: Netanyahu's truth, which he clearly believes in, or the Prosecution's, which they believe in just as strongly.