High-profile case10/21/2026

Mandelblit Told the Court About Leaks and Investigators’ Actions

At Benjamin Netanyahu’s trial, former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified about alleged leaks from the State Attorney’s Office and the police. He also stated that, at the time, he was unaware of a senior investigator’s personal ties, which he believed should have warranted removing the investigator from involvement in the related cases.

Key facts

•Witness: Avichai Mandelblit
•Defendant: Benjamin Netanyahu
•Judge at the hearing: Moshe Bar-Am
•Defense attorney: Amit Hadad
•Proceedings mentioned: Case 2000 and the Prime Minister’s Residences Case
•The source does not state that any decision was made following the hearing

Suspicions of Leaks

Mandelblit said that he suspected two individuals from the State Attorney’s Office and the police of passing on information. According to him, the aim may have been to pressure him into approving the advancement of the investigation against the prime minister. When Judge Moshe Bar-Am asked whether he had yielded to the pressure, the witness replied that, on the contrary, he had acted with great caution.

Police Contacts With the Journalist

Netanyahu’s attorney, Amit Hadad, noted that Mandelblit had asked the police to cease contact with journalist Ben Caspit. The former attorney general confirmed this and explained that he had developed a sense that the journalist was directing the police’s actions, rather than the police conducting the investigation independently. Mandelblit also said that he later learned of the possibility that the prime minister’s drivers had passed information to journalists, but he does not remember exactly when he learned about the sources.

Conversations With the Media

The defense presented a report that included details from an internal meeting at the State Attorney’s Office. Mandelblit explained that he himself had held a background conversation with a female journalist, in coordination with his spokesperson. According to him, such contacts are permitted if journalists are given an explanation of the process, without analyzing specific testimony and evidence.

The Senior Investigator’s Ties

Mandelblit confirmed that, at the time, he had not been informed of senior investigator Avi Rotenberg’s ties with Judy Nir Mozes, who was in conflict with Sara Netanyahu. Rotenberg carried out investigative actions and prepared materials in Case 2000 and the Prime Minister’s Residences Case against the prime minister’s wife. Mandelblit acknowledged that the situation was problematic and said that it might have been appropriate to remove the investigator from involvement in the cases; according to him, he should have been informed of these circumstances.

What the Court Decided

The source describes the witness’s testimony and the defense’s questions but does not report any court decision resulting from this hearing. The article also does not state the case number, the court’s full name, the exact date of the hearing, or the statutory provisions applied.

What this means for you

The testimony concerns the independence of the investigation, law-enforcement authorities’ contacts with the media, and a possible conflict of interest involving an investigator. For ordinary citizens, this illustrates that the defense may raise questions before the court about how materials were collected and how participants in the investigation conducted themselves. However, the mere discussion of violations does not indicate that the court found them proven or altered the outcome of the trial.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings