Roman Zadorov
Roman Zadorov (Ukrainian: Роман Задоров; born in 1978) is an Ukrainian citizen, who is serving a life sentence in Israel for the murder of 13.5 year old girl, Tair Rada in 2006 in the Nofey Golan high school. His prosecution and conviction are widely believed by experts and the public in Israel to be a case of framing by police, false prosecution and false conviction. Israeli Criminal Law Professor Boaz Sangero wrote: "Conviction with no real evidence". Mordechai Kremnitzer (Professor Emeritus of International Law at Hebrew University, one of the leaders of the Israel Democracy Institute) wrote:"Conduct of the prosecution is scary... the prosecution is not seeking the truth... the justice system is mostly busy protecting itself..." The case is unprecedented in positioning senior legal experts, senior forensic medical experts, the Israel Medical Association, the Ministry of Health (Israel), NGOs and the public at large against various types of wrongdoing by the justice system.[1]
Personal history
Roman Zadorov is a citizen of the Ukraine, who arrived in Israel in 2002 as a tourist and then extended his stay. Eventually, he married Olga, an Israeli citizen, in 2005. Two months prior to the murder their first son was born. Zadorov worked in construction and barely spoke Hebrew at the time of the events.
Murder and initial investigation
In December 2006, 13.5 year old student Tair Rada decided to skip the second hour of drama class. She stayed for a while with friends out in the school yard, then went into the high school building to drink water. She never returned. Later that evening, when she failed to return home, her parents called the police. Tair was found murdered in a locked stall in the girls' bathroom – her throat slit twice and numerous additional cuts on her body.
Police initially detained a homeless person, then a gardener as the suspects, but both were soon released.[2]
In a dramatic press conference two weeks after the murder date, the Israel Police announced that 29 year old Ukrainian Roman Zadorov was held as the most likely suspect and that he confessed to a police informer in jail that he had murdered Tair.[3] A day later, his attorney said that Zadorov recanted any confession.[4]
The motive for the murder, as stated by police, was insults that Tair hurled at Zadorov after he denied her request for a cigarette. However, Tair's family said that Tair never smoked, and that she couldn't stand cigarette smoke either. Her friends said that rude talk and insults, as described by police, were unlikely conduct for Tair. That claimed motive was later entirely dropped. No alternative motive for the murder was presented by police in the January 18, 2007 indictment.[5]
Evidence
Later, in 2010, senior criminal law professor Boaz Sangero wrote:
- Conviction with no real evidence. The conviction is primarily based on confession and a shoe imprint. There is no scientific evidence that ties that suspect to the crime scene, there is no motive for the murder. The suspect denied his guilt throughtout [sic?] most of the interrogation and the years of the litigation. When he confessed, he never led the investigators to any new evidence.[6]
Sangero also explicitly stated that Zadorov's guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Confession and murder reenactment video
Professor Sangero also noted that Zadorov's purported confessions included obvious false evidence. Sangero also attacked the heavy reliance of the Israeli courts on confessions in general. Such confessions are often extracted through undue conduct by law enforcement, but the Israeli courts still hold them admissible.
The murder reenactment video later became a key part of the evidence in the trial.[7] However, as became evident, the video was heavily directed and edited. Zadorov couldn't even identify the bathroom stall, where the murder had been committed. Police effectively directed him throughout the reenactment.
DNA profiling
Initially, the Israel Police told the press that DNA samples from the crime scene were matched with Zadorov's.[8]
DNA evidence and other "mounting evidence" were cited by the Judge in the Acre court in remanding Zadorov to custody in mid-January 2007.[9]
Later, the indictment was filed with no DNA evidence at all.[10]
Israeli media reported following the filing of the indictment:
- Roman Zadorov may have been indicted on suspicion of killing 13-year old Katzrin schoolgirl Tair Rada based on a DNA sample which police failed to produce...[11]
The State Prosecution explained the filing of the indictment with no DNA evidence and no laboratory test results regarding the hairs as follows:
- The fact that the prosecution filed an indictment based on substantial evidence that exists implicating Zadorov without waiting for the U.S. lab results show there is sufficient evidence tying him to the murder, and the case isn't based wholly on that issue.[12]
Finally, the claim of DNA match to Zadorov was entirely abandoned. But the Israel Police never tried to match the DNA samples to any other suspect.[13]
Shoe imprints
Shoe imprints, found in the blood in the bathroom stall, matched youth-size shoes, much smaller than Zadorov could possibly wear. The Israel Police did not attribute them to anybody.
Israel Police expert and the State Prosecution claimed in court that blood stains on Tair's pants and shoes were Zadorov's shoe imprints. However, in court they presented grossly modified images of the evidence to support such claims.
UK shoe imprint expert Dr Guy Cooper testified in 2009 that these stains could not be considered Zadorov's shoe imprints.[14]
Former FBI shoe imprint expert William Bodziak, who also testified in the OJ Simpson trial, doubted in his 2013 testimony that these stains could be Zadorov's shoe imprints, or that they could be undoubtedly considered shoe imprints at all. Another opinion of the same Israel Police shoe imprint expert has been recently rejected by the courts in another false murder conviction case.[15]
In an unrelated case, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that show print evidence was problematic and dismissed the expert testimony of the same policeman who testified in Roman Zadorov's case.[16]
Hairs
Long dark hairs were discovered in Tair's hand. They were not Zadorov's hair, and all of them were Tair's, according to laboratory examinations. [17]
The State Prosecution explained their origin, and the Israel Police matched them to Tair.
Fingerprints
Fingerprints (65!) were discovered in the murder scene. They were neither Tair's nor Zadorov's. The Israel Police never explained their origin and never attempted to match them with any other suspect. Theoretically, the murderer could have worn gloves, but the State Prosecution claimed that the murder was impulsive, not premeditated.
Other biological evidence
A total of 150 biological samples from the crime scene were tested, but none matched Zadorov. No attempt was made to match them to any other suspect.
The knife
The murder tool, according to the purported confession and reconstruction was a Japanese, smooth-edged cardboard knife. However, it was never retrieved. In his purported confession, Zadorov said that he had placed it under the tiles that he had been laying that day. But the tiles were removed, and the knife was never found. Moreover, two senior forensic medical experts later testified that the murder was committed using a serrated knife, not a smooth-edged Japanese cardboard knife. (see below: Dr Forman, Dr Kugel)
According to forensic medical expert opinion, the murder was committed by a left-handed person, while Zadorov is right-handed.
Other
The murder was timed to approximately 1:30 pm. Zadorov was never sighted around that time in the school building. On the contrary, around that time he was on the phone with his employer. Zadorov ran out of cement for laying the tiles and asked for additional supply. His employer asked him to wait for him near the high school gate.
Half an hour later, Zadorov was sighted in the school cafeteria, and according to testimony appeared calm as usual. He continued his work as usual till 5:30pm.
No blood stained clothes or shoes, which could have been expected, given the gruesome murder scene, were ever discovered.
Students in Tair's high school
Tair had been on bad terms with some girls in the high school for several years prior to the murder. According to testimonies, she was under social boycott by certain girls in the school for some 3 years. In the days prior to the murder she expressed in school fear for her life. Earlier, she had also asked to be switched classes.
According to testimonies by teachers, students in the high school prepared posters on the day following the murder, which said, "Tair, your day has come!"
Media report already in the early days after the murder criticize the Israel Police for searching for the murderer through the vast areas of the Golan Heights and the Galilee, instead of focusing on suspects within the school building itself. The same report even goes as far as suggesting to the Israel Police to start from the students' online chat room. Indeed the chat room included notes by students, who claimed to have information about the murder, who claimed that threats were issued against anybody who would cooperate with police, and one note explicitly stated that the issue was that popular 11th grade boys desired sex with Tair, and it ended up with knives...
A student in the high school later testified that she saw under the bathroom stall, where the murder was committed, Tair's Puma shoes, youth-size Allstar shoes and blood... Another student's testimony implied that she knew more, "but repressed it"... Yet another student stated that "at our age, we don't tell on others"...
A long list of students went through the bathroom around the murder time, while Tair apparently struggled with the murderers, and some of them even noticed highly suspicious circumstances, but none ever said a word to anyone.
In police investigation and in court testimonies later on, it was again stated that word was spread immediately among the high school students that anybody who said anything about the murder would suffer consequences... But no effort was made to follow such critical matters. Even the Nazareth District Court reprimanded the Israel Police during the trial for failing to follow up on investigation of a student, who stated that there were students who knew, who the murderers were...
Tair's mother stated on various occasions that she didn't believe that Zadorov was the murderer, and that the true murderers were "from Tair's world". At other times, she alluded more directly that the murderers were high school students.
Online social network groups, who support Roman's cause, published the names of the students, who were most closely involved in the affair, and also information about close family relations of some of them with both senior and junior Israel Police personnel. Israel Police took action to remove such references from the social networks.
Claims were made that the information published online and by media, amounted to persecution of the girls.[18]
Judicial process
Trial commenced in January 2007 with the filing of the indictment in the Nazareth District Court, followed by the September 2010 initial conviction, October 2010 filing of Zadorov's appeal in the Supreme Court of Israel, March 2013 remand to the Nazareth District Court for additional review of the evidence, and February 2014 supplemental judgment - again convicting Zadorov. On December 23, 2015, the Israeli Supreme Court denied Zadorov's appeal by a 2:1 decision of a panel of three justices. Zadorov's team immediately asked for a new hearing by an expanded panel.
No signed confession was filed with the indictment. Zadorov refused to sign the confessions, dictated by police. However, police officers testified that he confessed in investigation that he had committed the murder. Zadorov continued to deny any confession throughout the trial.[19]
No motive for the murder was provided in the indictment.
The 456 page, September 2010 conviction by a three-judge panel headed by Judge Yitzhak Cohen - then Presiding Judge of the Nazareth District Court – was read out in a dramatic open court hearing. It stated that there was no doubt that Zadorov was the murderer, and that his testimony was full of lies and manipulations. Zadorov was further convicted on obstruction police investigation.[20] The lack of any motive for the murder was found no object by the judges.[21]
However, to this date neither the authentic September 2010 conviction nor the authentic September 2010 sentencing record of the Nazaretch District Court have been discovered. The conviction record is entirely missing from the Nazareth Court's electronic case management system, and the sentencing record, which appears in the system, is missing the signature of Judge Haim Galpaz... Top defense lawyer Avigdor Feldman, who joined the case pro bono in 2014, late in the appeal process, and who is known for his dark humor, wrote in December 2015, that “remnants of the judgment records were scattered in the wind across the Jezreel Valley” (which Nazareth overlooks).[22]
In March 2013, the Supreme Court of Israel remanded the case back to the Nazareth District Court for rehearing of evidence by expert witnesses, as requested by Zadorov’s lawyers:
- William Bodziak, a world-renowned forensics expert - regarding the footprint found on the clothes of the murdered girl, and
- Dr. Maya Forman-Reznik, a pathologist - regarding the murder weapon and the trauma injuries found on her head.
Key evidence, related to the murder knife and shoe imprints, key issues in this case, were not settled. [23]
Following the March 2013 remand of the case by Supreme Court of Israel to the Nazareth District Court, the Jerusalem Post published a special editorial, saying in part:
- The court’s intervention must be welcomed by all Israelis who care to see justice served – and that without presuming to opine on Zadorov’s guilt or innocence. From the outset too much in this case aroused extreme discomfort about both police and prosecution conduct. Their strident opposition to reviewing the case, despite the possibility that exculpatory evidence might be presented, should in itself prompt more than a few troubling questions... The heightened publicity intensified the ambition of officers and prosecutors to “produce results” and score prestige points. The three judges who convicted Zadorov in 2010 fully subscribed to the prosecution’s version and ascribed ostensible uncertainties to doubts sown tendentiously by “irresponsible journalists.” But focus on the press is too facile. The police is hardly innocent. It and the prosecution are serially the most egregious of leakers. Often we learn of what transpired during interrogations while suspects are still being grilled. In the Rada case, the police had only itself to blame for the prodigious innuendo exacerbated by its one-sided leaks and the paucity of supporting physical evidence... In the Zadorov instance, too many doubts have lingered, including the problematic confession and reenactment by a suspect who barely spoke Hebrew. The handling of forensic evidence was sloppy in the extreme and some potentially critical clues were altogether neglected because of fixation on Zadorov. Worst of all was the jarring refusal by the prosecution to take account of exculpatory DNA evidence and to reevaluate other apparent gaps in its forensic data. That never seemed to square with elementary fairness. In the final analysis, the buck stops with the police. Trustworthy academic studies indicate that in this country, whenever police investigators deem someone guilty, the odds are even higher than elsewhere that person will not get off. In major felony trials, judges accept the police premise 98 percent of the time. This puts special onus on both policemen and prosecutors to clean up their acts.[24]
In February 2014, the Nazareth District Court returned a supplemental judgment, again convicting Zadorov. The Nazareth District Court rejected international expert opinions, which contradicted the Israel Police expert, relative to the matching of a shoe imprint on the victim's pants with Zadorov's shoe. The Israel Police expert showed in court modified images to justify his opinion. One of the international experts said it could not even be clearly identified as a shoe imprint. The other said it could not be identified as Zadorov's shoe imprint. The purported shoe imprint was the only physical evidence, purportedly tying Zadorov to the murder.[25]
In January 2014, prior to the issuance of the supplemental judgment, senior criminal law professor Boaz Sangero wrote: “When will Roman Zadorov be acquitted?” Sangero notes in part:
- The [original] judgment is unconvincing relative to the guilt of the defendant. The conviction was primarily based on a problematic confession and on the testimony of a policeman, who is considered an expert on shoe imprints, who claimed that there was a match between Zadorov's show and the shoe imprtint on the victim's pants. As I showed, Zadorov's confession had the typical traits of a false confession...[26]
In February 2014, following the supplemental judgment, Professor Sangero further stated in media interviews: "I cannot explain Zadorov's repeat conviction". Such lack of deference to the judgment of the court by a law professor is unprecedented in Israel.[27]
The December 23, 2015 denial of the appeal by the Supreme Court of Israel was rendered by a 2:1 split panel. The Jerusalem Post summed up the controversy and the Supreme Court's decision as follows:
- The case captivated the media and public. It was a tragic, small-town murder that, from the beginning, was dogged by rumors, including that local teenagers had killed Rada and the town or teachers had covered it up, finding an easy fall guy in Zadorov, an immigrant from the former Soviet Union... The 300-page majority opinion upholding the conviction on Wednesday, which included justices Isaac Amit and Zvi Zylbertal, found three major grounds for its decision, despite the disputes over the shoe prints and the knife. Aspects of Zadorov’s confession while under arrest to a confidential informant, of his confession to interrogators and his participation in reenacting aspects of the crime were decisive, wrote the court.[28]
The Supreme Court's denial of the appeal failed to settle the case. Zadorov's team immediately asked for a new hearing by an expanded panel, a process that is yet to commence (January 2016). Public support for Zadorov tripled within days following the Supreme Court's decision.
The case of Roman Zadorov raised the issue of prosecutorial misconduct, lack of oversight of the State Prosecution, false convictions in general, and reluctance of the Israeli courts to reverse false convictions.[29]
Judge Yitzhak Cohen affair
By September 2014, Presiding Judge Yitzhak Cohen of the Nazareth District Court, who twice convicted Zadorov, left on vacation, and by November 2014 he resigned, after police recommended his prosecution for sex crimes in chambers against a female attorney and sex crimes against minors.
In parallel, Justice Minister Livni ordered investigation against senior figures in the Israel Police and State Prosecution relative to suspicions of cover-up of Judge Cohen suspected sex crimes. Credit for exposing the case, while Cohen was a candidate for a Supreme Court Justice was given to social media.[30][31]
As of this date (January 2016) the State Prosecution has failed to file an indictment in the case of Judge Yitzhak Cohen. Based on historic records, it is doubted that such indictment would ever be filed. Regardless of ample evidence of widespread judicial corruption, during Israel's close to 70 year history, no judge has ever been convicted for crimes committed during his tenure as a judge, and only one judge was prosecuted for corruption (in the 1960's).
Conduct of the prosecution and the related Dr Forman and Dr Kugel affairs
Regarding the Zadorov affair, senior criminal law professor Mota Kremnitzer wrote in October 2014: "Conduct of the prosecution is scary... the State Prosecution is not seeking the truth... the justice system is mostly busy protecting itself..."[32] His comments were published in the wake of the Tel-Aviv Labor Court judgment in the lawsuit of senior forensic medical expert Dr Maya Forman against the State of Israel, Ministry of Health and others. Her case became an entirely separate scandal, which was described by Israeli media as persecution, settlement of accounts, and a retaliation campaign by Chief State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan against Dr Forman for her professional, honest, expert testimony in the Zadorov affair.[33]
The State Prosecution first fought to prevent Dr Forman from testifying in the Nazareth court in Roman Zadorov's case.[34] Dr Forman eventually testified for Zadorov in the Nazareth District Court, and her expert testimony, that the murder was committed using a serrated knife, not a smooth-edged Japanese knife, as claimed by the State Prosecution, and as purportedly confessed by Zadorov, dealt a major blow to the State Prosecution case. It undermined the integrity of both the contested "confession" and reconstruction. Review of the evidence regarding the knife was a central issue in the March 2013 remand to the Nazareth District Court.
In its February 2014 supplemental judgment the Nazareth District Court not only rejected Dr Forman's expert testimony, but also heavily criticized her professional conduct. In the aftermath, Chief State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan, who claimed that he was backed by Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein, tried to impose professional restrictions on Dr Forman and to prohibit her from further appearances in courts as an expert witness – effectively crippling her professional employment.
The labor dispute became an unprecedented scandal in its own sake, with the Israeli Medical Association joining as a friend of the court, strongly supporting Dr Forman. Moreover, while the Israeli Ministry of Health was named Defendant in the labor dispute, Minister of Health Yael German wrote a public letter to the Attorney General, stating that his conduct against Dr Forman “lacks legal foundation and carries overarching and dangerous implications... blatant violation of Human Rights, the fundamentals of law and justice...”
The case in the Tel-Aviv Labor Court then generated another separate scandal, when the State Prosecution tried to solicit an affidavit in support of its position from another senior forensic medical expert in the State Forensic Institute, Dr Chen Kugel. Dr Kugel provided the State Prosecution a curve-ball affidavit, which for the first time disclosed that he also supported Dr Forman's professional opinion that the murder was committed using a serrated knife. Dr Kugel never testified in the Nazareth District Court trial. However, the State Prosecution made false representations to the Court, suggesting that Kugel supported the Prosecution's position regarding the knife. It was even relied upon in the Conviction. Dr Kugel's affidavit in the Tel-Aviv Labor Court also strongly objected to any professional restrictions on an expert, i.e., Dr Forman, who provided an honest professional opinion in court, as a dangerous precedent.
The State Prosecution first tried to gag Dr Kugel, and prevent his affidavit from being filed. Then, the State Prosecutoin tried to heavily edit his affidavit. Eventually, Dr Kugel's affidavit was filed, unmodified, both in the Tel-Aviv Labor Court and in Zadorov's appeal in the Supreme Court. Furthermore, both the original affidavit and the edited affidavit, proposed by the State Prosecution, were published, causing a new wave of criticism against the State Prosecution: Experts raised concerns that the Prosecution's conduct relative to Dr Kugel's affidavit amounted to tampering with a witness.[35]
In the wake of Dr Forman victory in the Tel-Aviv Labor Court,[36] senior law professor and former dean of the Hebrew University Law School Yoav Dotan wrote: "Dr Forman and Mr Nitzan”.[37] In his opinion article, Prof Dotan emphasized the wider implications of the entire affair, which undermined due process. Prof Dotan also criticized the extreme concentration of power by the State Prosecution and its lack of accountability, supporting the ongoing calls for a major reform in the offices of Attorney General and Chief State Prosecutor.
The Dr Formal and Dr Kugel scandals expanded into a heated debate over intergrity, or lack thereof in conduct of the State Prosecution, the lack of accountability for wrongdoing by the State Prosecution, and resistance of the State Prosecution to any civilian oversight.[38] [39][40]
Also In the wake of Dr Forman victory in the Tel-Aviv Labor Court, in December 2015, Ombudswoman of the Prosecution, retired Judge Hila Gerstel, issued a scathing report, effectively finding that the State Prosecution engaged in tampering with witnesses and perverting/obstruction of justice. Chief State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan objected to Gerstel's report, claiming that Gerstel overstepped her authority.
Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein issued an opinion, supporting Chief State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan, State's right to change officials' affidavits. In this case - change the affidavit of a State employee, who is a forensic expert, appearing in criminal murder litigation or a murder case...[41]
Based on Gerstel's report, criminal complaints were filed in December 2015 by the Israeli Governance and Democracy Movement (NGO) against senior State Prosecution and Ministry of Justice officers, alleging tampering with a witnesses and attempt to pervert and obstruct justice.
The case also raised again the issue of lack of integrity in the State Forensic Medical Institute before Dr Forman and Dr Kugel joined it. Prof Sangero wrote: “For decades the Israel Police and the State Prosecution dominated the Institute. Monopoly of police and the prosecution over scientific evidence has been established, and the evidence has been used almost exclusively to support convictions.”
In a mid January 2016 Knesset oversight committee hearing it was exposed that the Israel Police obtained a court decree and tried to confiscate all materials obtained by Arutz 7 investigative journalism program "Uvdah" regarding misconduct in the State Forensic Institute. According to "Uvdah" journalist Omri Essenheim, a policeman had appeared in their editorial offices and demanded to obtain any materials that had been collected as part of their investigative journalism work relative to conduct of the State Forensic Institute. The editorial staff refused to comply with police demands. Mr Essenheim added: "In the Zadorov affair the State Prosecution acted contrary to its stated mission of seeking the truth." [42]
Parents, public, and media
The victim's parents, whose representative, a private investigator and former police officer, was permitted to inspect the complete evidence in this case, did not believe that Roman is the murderer. Already in early 2007 the parents filed a petition with the Israeli Supreme Court, asking for re-opening of the murder investigation, and claiming that conduct of the Israel Police was "extremely unreasonable" in this case. The petition was summarily denied.[43] [44] [45]
In 2010, Tair's mother told media: “As far as I'm concerned, anything to do with the court, the prosecution and the police is pure delinquency. They abandoned my daughter." On various other occasions she explicitly stated that she believed that her daughter was killed by students in the school.[46]
In 2011, investigators Haim Sadovsky and Doron Beldinger filed a petition with the Supreme Court, also asking that the Supreme Court mandate re-opening of the police investigation in this case. Their petition was also denied.
In December 2014, a group of activists, who closely followed the case, filed with the Attorney General criminal complaints against the Israel Police investigation team for obstruction of the investigation and fabrication of evidence, and separately against the State Prosecution team - for fraud in the court.
In December 2015, Ombudswoman of the Prosecution, retired Judge Hila Gerstel issued a decision, stating that Chief State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan failed for a year to investigate the complaint against the prosecution, which alleged fraud in the courts.
Unprecedented public support for Roman's cause in Israel is expressed in the tens of thousands of citizens, who are registered in online support groups, routinely follow the case, published and discussed the evidence and conduct of the justice system, and call true investigation of Tair's murder.
The Nazareth District Court 2014 supplemental judgment was also unusual in its criticism of media coverage in this case. There is no doubt that media coverage in this case was central in exposing the ludicrous conduct of the Israeli Police, the State Prosecution, and the courts themselves. Ongoing TV, radio, and print coverage of the case are unprecedented, both in scope and in the manner in which they openly challenge of the courts.
The prosecution hoped that the denial of the appeal in December 2015 would bring to an end public criticism. However, the effect of the denial of the appeal in December 23, 2015 was paradoxical. Within 24–48 hours, public support for Zadorov approximately tripled. By mid January, 2016, in a nation of 8 millions, there are almost 250,000 members in online Zadorov Support groups (one Facebook group alone - "All the Truth regarding the Murder of Tair Rada" - had a member count of 214,445 on January 9, 2016),[47] and a large demonstrations in Tel-Aviv central square are planned. An international Avaaz petition was launched, calling upon Israeli President Rivlin to pardon on commute Zadorov's sentence. The petitiion was endorsed by notable US Rabbi Michael Lerner (rabbi), by notable US public intellectual Prof Noam Chomsky, and by veteran FBI agent and whistle-blower Coleen Rowley.
References
- ↑ Zernik, Joseph. "The Zadorov Affair: False murder conviction of a Ukrainian exposed massive corruption of the Israeli justice system". OpEdNews. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Einav, Hagai. "Golan murder: Second suspect released". YNet News. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi, Jack Khoury and Jonathan Lis. "Suspect Tells Police: I Killed Her in School Bathroom". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ REBECCA ANNA STOIL. "Tair-Rada-suspect-retracts-confession". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Construction Worker Indicted for Murder of Teenage Girl". Haaretz daiy. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Boaz Sangero. "Is Zadorov guilty?". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Police Show Video of Suspect Re-enacting Murder of Tair Rada". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi and Jack Khoury. "New Evidence Against Roman Zadorov: DNA and Footprints on Victim's Clothing". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Jack Khoury. "Judge Extends Remand of Suspect in Teen Murder, Says Evidence Mounting". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi and Jack Khoury. "DNA Evidence Not In, but Prosecution Still Plans to Indict Zadorov Tomorrow". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ JPOST.COM STAFF. "'Police fail to produce DNA test in Zadorov case'". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Police Show Video of Suspect Re-enacting Murder of Tair Rada". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ REBECCA ANNA STOIL. "Report: Zadarov DNA tests inconclusive". The Jerusalem. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "British Expert: Shoe Prints on Slain Golan Teen Rada Were Not Those of Accused Killer". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "FBI Expert Disputes Key Evidence in Conviction for 2006 Schoolgirl Murder". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Israel's Supreme Court Rules Footprints Are Problematic Evidence". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Police Show Video of Suspect Re-enacting Murder of Tair Rada". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Coby Ben-Simhon. "Murder Will Out". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Suspected Killer of Kaztrin Teen Retracted Second Confession". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Zadorov Convicted in Tair Rada Murder, Gets Life in Prison". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "No Motive Needed to Prove Guilt, Say Nazareth Judges". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Avigdor Feldman. "Cadavers, Stench, and Strong Formaldehyde Odor". HaMakom. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ TIMES OF ISRAEL STAFF. "Court to hear new testimony in Tair Rada murder case". The Times of Israel. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ "Editorials: The Zadorov case". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Ahiya Raved. "Court upholds Zadorov's conviction in teen girl's murder". YNet News. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Boaz Sangero. "When would Roman Zadorov be acquitted?". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ "Interview with Prof Boaz Sangero". Israel Broadcasting Authority, Channel 1. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Supreme Court upholds conviction of Roman Zadorov for 2006 murder of teen Tair Rada". The Jurusalem Post. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Ayelett Shani. "How You Could Land in Jail for Committing No Crime". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Mazal Mualem. "Did Israel's judicial system cover up sex scandal?". Al-Monitor. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Israeli Judge Resigns Over Sex Crime Allegations". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel and Ronni Linder-Gantz. "Professor Motta Kremnitzer:"Conduct of the State Prosecution in the Zadorov case is scary".". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Public Defender Accuses State of Vengefulness". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Chief Pathologist Barred From Retrial on 2006 Murder of Israeli Teen.". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Chief Pathologist: State Is Gagging Doctors in Trial". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel and Ronny Linder-Ganz. "Controversial Coroner Wins Legal Battle With State Prosecutor’s Office". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Yoav Dotan. "Dr Forman and Mister Nitzan". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Revital Hovel. "Former Justice Dorit Beinisch Slams Oversight of State Prosecution". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Ronny Linder-Ganz and Revital Hovel. "Israeli State Prosecutor Admits He Went Too Far in Blocking Chief Pathologist Appointment". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Sharon Pulwer. "Attorney General Quizzes Legal Watchdog Over Exceeding Authority". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Sharon Pulwer. "Attorney General Backs State's Right to Change Officials' Affidavits". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Hizki Ezra. "Israel Police tried to confiscate Uvdah investigative journalism materials Attorney General Backs State's Right to Change Officials' Affidavits". Arutz 7. Retrieved January 11, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi and Haaretz Correspondent. "Rada Family Calls for Panel of Inquiry Into Daughter's Murder". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ JPOST.COM STAFF. "Rada family petitions Court for details on murder". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ Eli Ashkenazi. "Parents of Murdered Golan Teen Petition Court to Reopen Probe". Haaretz daily. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ JPOST.COM STAFF. "Ilana Rada: Zadarov didn't kill my daughter". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
- ↑ "All the Truth about the Murder of Tair Rada". Facebook. Retrieved January 9, 2015.