After the photo shocked the country - now revealed what happened in Agam Tzarfati's video call: "It's just a smile"
Agam Tzarfati's defense attorney, Omri Stern, reveals the defense's version in the murder case of Binyamin Razi. He claims that Tzarfati did not recruit the minors, did not know about their arming with knives, did not see the attack in the video call, and did not want Razi's death. He describes her as a normative girl whose relationship with Razi was violent, and that she had filed complaints in the past. The defense separates grief from remorse and focuses on the gap between her presence in the chain of events and complicity in planning.
Agam Tzarfati's defense attorney, Omri Stern, breaks his silence and presents the defense's version in the murder case of Binyamin Razi. He describes Tzarfati as a completely normative girl, serving in the IDF, from a normative family, whose sister serves in the Israel Police. According to him, the criminal world is unfamiliar to her. He claims that the relationship with Binyamin was full of arguments and violence, mainly on his part, and that Agam had filed complaints in the past. He clarifies that he cannot determine whether a restraining order was in effect on the day of the incident. Stern denies the possibility that Agam recruited the minors, claiming they came on their own initiative. He explains that the purpose of returning to the apartment was to take belongings, including a bag with clothes and perfume, and that Agam had a previous experience where Binyamin destroyed her property. He claims that Agam did not know about the arming with knives, and that she did not see the attack in the video call, but only heard screams. He admits that she did not call MDA, but explains that she was very stressed. Stern separates grief over Binyamin's death from remorse that implies responsibility. He says that Agam expresses grief but does not take responsibility. He describes the arrest as difficult for her, with moments of breakdown. He believes that the case should not end as the prosecution attributes to her. The defense line focuses on what she did not do: did not recruit, did not see, did not plan, did not want his death. The gap between her presence in the chain of events and complicity in planning will be the focus of the legal battle.