'We couldn't believe our ears': Years after the Holyland trial, Shula Zaken's lawyer opens up

In an interview with the Ma'ariv podcast, attorney Ofer Bartal, Shula Zaken's lawyer in the Holyland trial, reveals the shock that gripped the defense team when they listened to recordings of conversations between Ehud Olmert and Zaken. Bartal describes the heavy price of her becoming a state witness. The article reviews the content of the recordings, which dealt with money and Zaken's diaries, and the conflicting claims of the prosecution and Olmert regarding their meaning.

In a special interview with the Ma'ariv podcast, attorney Ofer Bartal, Shula Zaken's lawyer in the Holyland trial, reveals the shock that gripped the defense team when they first listened to recordings of conversations between former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his bureau chief, Shula Zaken. Bartal says that Zaken knew Olmert since she was 16, and describes the heavy price of her becoming a state witness: "They always see you as a snitch, the informer, even though you are helping the court do justice." The article reviews the recordings that became a central part of the affair. Zaken, who for decades was one of the closest figures to Olmert, reached a deal with the prosecution and gave it recordings of conversations she had with him. In 2014, when she was brought to testify at the Jerusalem District Court, parts of the transcripts were allowed to be published. The recordings dealt with money, Zaken's diaries, and the possibility that she would testify. In one conversation, Olmert is heard telling Zaken: "I am very afraid that you will take the witness stand, not because of me, but because of you." The prosecution claimed that some of the conversations strengthened the claims that Olmert made personal use of funds held by attorney Uri Messer and tried to influence Zaken's decision whether to testify. In contrast, Olmert and his associates claimed that he did not ask to prevent her from testifying, but warned her of the legal damage that could be caused to her, and that the funds were used for political purposes. It was also claimed that Zaken conducted some of the conversations in a way designed to elicit incriminating statements from him.