
| Case No. | Offence | Plea bargain | Sentence | Observations | Decision rendered on: |
| CC 1107/02
The State of |
Defendant
1: Seven
TIP charges, 5 pandering charges, 7 illegal employment charges, and
exploitation. Defendant
2:
|
- |
District
Court: Defendant
1: 10
years imprisonment, and 2 years suspended imprisonment. Defendant
2: 9
years imprisonment, and 2 years suspended imprisonment.
|
The
defendants pleaded guilty to the charges in the amended indictment,
according to the agreement with the Prosecution. There was no agreement
with regard to the sentence. |
|
| CC 1210/01
The State of |
Defendant
1: TIP,
causing a person to engage in prostitution, indecent act. Defendant
2: TIP,
causing a person to engage in prostitution, false imprisonment,
maintaining a place for prostitution, pandering and threats. Defendant
3:
|
- |
District
Court: Defendants
1-2
– 8
years imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment and compensation to the
victim of 25,000 Defendant
3
–
|
The
Court took into consideration the fact that The third accused was not
involved in the trafficking, and suffers from severe mental health
problems.
|
|
| CC 1240/02
The state of |
TIP, pandering, maintaining a place for prostitution, use of forged documents. | Up to 36-months imprisonment. |
District
court: 3
years imprisonment, 18 months suspended imprisonment, 5,000
|
||
|
CC
1064/02 The
State of
CA [12] 11196/02
Michael Prudental v. The State of
|
TIP (2 victims), pandering, threats, false imprisonment. | Up to 3 years imprisonment. |
District
Court: 24
months imprisonment, 18 months suspended imprisonment Supreme
Court:
|
The defendant argued that he should have not been convicted of TIP as he did not “purchase” the two victims, but rather “kept them” for another. The Court rejected the appeal and held that the trafficking offence should be interpreted widely and not “technically” in light of the purpose of the legislation and in light of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (which Israel signed in 2001). |
CC
|
|
CC
1036/03
|
Aiding and abetting an attempt to TIP | 8-18 months imprisonment. |
District
Court:
|
The defendant had a minor role in the TIP offence. The other accomplices were tried for their part. | |
|
CC
905/03 The state of -----------------
|
TIP (2 victims) |
- |
District
Court: 16
months imprisonment, 12 month suspended imprisonment, 1000
6000
Supreme
Court:
|
The
accused pleaded guilty to the charges of the amended indictment. There was
no agreement on the sentence.
|
CC CA
|
|
CC
946/02 The State of ----------------- CA
3204/03, 3213\03 The State of
|
TIP (3 offences), aiding and abetting
TIP, aiding and abetting aggravated forgery, Pandering, obstruction of
justice, aiding and abetting illegal stay in |
- |
District
Court: 5
years imprisonment, 3 years suspended imprisonment. Supreme
Court:
|
An
agreement was reached between the parties regarding the charges. The
defendant was convicted on the basis of his guilty plea (to the amended
indictment). The State Attorney appealed the sentence. The Supreme Court imposed a
more severe sentence. The
sentence was appreciably more severe even though the offence was not
attended by violence.
|
CC CA
|
|
CC
910/02 The State of ----------------- CA
1609/03, 2260, 2293 Borisov v. The State of ----------------- ACH [13] 9980/03
Borisov v. The State of |
Defendant
1:
TIP (3 offences), causing a person to engage in prostitution (2 offences),
Pandering, false imprisonment, assault.
|
- |
District
Court: Defendant
1
– Defendant
2
– 5
years imprisonment. District
Court:
|
The
first defendant was acquitted from the TIP charges. The State Attorney
appealed the decision with regard to the acquittal and the sentence. The
Supreme Court accepted the State’s appeal, and convicted the accused of
TIP and causing a person to engage in prostitution. Obviously, the new
sentence, to be rendered by the District Court, should be more severe now.
|
CC CA
|
| CC 5086/02 The State of |
Defendant
1
- Kidnapping
for purpose of imprisonment, rubbery, false imprisonment, TIP, Pandering,
attempt to commit TIP, rape, Sodomy possessing firearm. Defendants
4 and 5 -
|
- |
District
Court: Defendant
1
– 15
years imprisonment, Defendant
4
– 10
years imprisonment, Defendant
5
–
|
The sentences imposed by the Court on defendants 4-5 were higher than the ones advocated by the Prosecution. |
CC
|
| CC
1185/02 The State of ----------------- CA
106/03
|
TIP (one victim), maintaining a place for purpose of prostitution, pandering, and false imprisonment. |
- |
District
Court: 2.5
years imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment. Supreme
Court:
|
The State Attorney appealed the sentence. The Supreme Court accepted the appeal. |
CC CA
|
|
CC
1128/02 The
State of ----------------- CA
3483/03
|
TIP (3 offences), pandering, threats, forgery, conspiracy to commit a felony |
- |
District
Court: 5
years imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment. Supreme
Court:
|
The defendant was acquitted from one of the TIP charges. The State Attorney appealed the decision with regard to the acquittal and the sentence. The Supreme Court rejected the appeal regarding the acquittal but imposed a more severe sentence. |
CC CA
|
|
CC
1236/02 The State of ----------------- CA
6141/03
|
TIP, pandering, false imprisonment, threats. | 42 months imprisonment (including activated suspended imprisonment to be served in overlapping), 20,000NIS fine and 20,000NIS compensation for the victim. |
District
Court:
|
The
District Court did not respect the plea bargain, and decided that the
activated sentences would be served consecutively.
|
CC
|
| CC 1241/02 The State of |
TIP (one victim), pandering, false imprisonment, threats | 4 years imprisonment, suspended
imprisonment, 2,000 |
District
court: 4
years imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment, 2,000
|
The defendant was already serving a long prison sentence for other offences when charged with TIP, his partner was only charged of pandering and sentenced to 13 months imprisonment. The defendant was in the past a police officer and suffered a severe head injury. He also suffers from other serious medical problems. | |
| CC 1123/03 The State of |
Defendant
1 – TIP (one victim), rape, pandering, threats, false imprisonment,
assault Defendant
2 –
|
- |
District
Court: Defendant
1
– 12
years imprisonment, 3 years suspended imprisonment, 35,000 Defendant
2
–
|
The defendant agreed to plea guilty after the Court heard the testimony of the victim. There was no agreement with the Prosecution on the punishment. | |
|
CC
1100/03
|
District
Court:
|
| Case No. | Offence | Plea bargain | Sentence | Observations | Decision rendered on: |
| CC 1210/01 The State of |
1st
defendant: TIP,
causing a person to engage in prostitution, indecent act. 2nd
defendant: TIP,
causing a person to engage in prostitution, false imprisonment,
maintaining a place for prostitution, pandering and threats. 3rd
defendant:
|
- |
District
Court: Defendants
1-2 – 8
years imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment and compensation to the
victim of 25,000 Defendant
3 –
|
The Court took into consideration the fact that The third accused was not involved in the trafficking, and suffers from severe mental health problems. | |
|
CC
5049/02
|
TIP (3 offences), causing a person to engage in prostitution, causing a person to engage in prostitution under aggravated circumstances, false imprisonment. |
- |
District
Court:
|
The Court took into consideration the fact that the accomplice was sentenced to two years imprisonment, following a plea bargain. | |
|
CC
212/01
|
Defendant
1: TIP
(one victim), pandering Defendant
2:
|
Defendant
1: No
agreed sentence. Defendant
2: 6
months imprisonment to be served by labor.
|
District
Court: Defendant
1: 4
years imprisonment, 12 months suspended imprisonment. Defendant
2: 6
months imprisonment to be served by labor, 12 months suspended
imprisonment.
|
The
Court did not impose compensation for the victim, as she has already left
the country.
|
|
| CC 1184/02 The State of |
TIP (3 offences), causing a person to engage in prostitution under aggravated circumstances | 5 years and nine months imprisonment |
District
Court:
|
There was no use of violence by the accused or false imprisonment of the victims. The court notes that the fine is relatively law, as the plea bargain did not include a fine, and the Prosecution did not inform the defense that it was going to ask for the imposition of a fine. |
| Case No. | Offence | Plea bargain | Sentence | Observations | Decision rendered on: |
|
CC
3029/00 The State of ------------
|
Kidnapping for blackmail, false imprisonment, rape (3 victims), conspiracy to commit a crime |
- |
District
court: 10
years
imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment Supreme
Court:
|
- |
CC
CA
|
|
CC
1054/03 The
State of CA
7732/03
|
Pandering, maintaining a place for prostitution, assault | Up to 3 years imprisonment, 100,000 |
District
court: 2.5
years imprisonment, 2 years suspended imprisonment, 100,000 Supreme
Court:
|
The original indictment included a TIP charge, but it was deleted due to evidentiary difficulties. The Court noted that the maximum penalty for pandering is 5 years imprisonment, and that the accused pleaded guilty. The Court noted that the high financial gain warrants a high fine. |
CC
|