The indictment filed with the Jerusalem Magistrates Court alleges that during a search for drugs and weapons in Shikh Ali’s home, police found a substance suspected of being cannabis. When the suspect refused to cooperate, he was tied up in front of his wife and children and treated violently.
After his release, Shikh Ali filed a complaint with the police investigations unit, alleging that during his arrest he had been seriously injured by the police and much of the time handcuffed and blindfolded, even though he was not suspected of security offenses.
When the incident first surfaced in the public last year, police claimed that officers used “reasonable force” at the time of the arrest and that the injury was likely caused when Shikh Ali’s face pressed against one of the officers’ shoes. They claimed that what appeared to be a Star of David was the pattern created by the laces and buckles on the shoe.
Three of the officers were also indicted for destroying evidence. That included intentionally deleting the GoPro videos that documented the incident, as well as photos they took on their cell phones, to prevent them from being used as evidence.
Because he was hit with it hard enough to make the mark, but his eye socket didn’t allow it to hit him all the way so only part of it left a mark.
No I totally get how one would get the mark. What has me curious is that it looks like someone attempted to cut the design in their face.
You get hit hard enough with something with a raised design on it it will cut you. Someone with a ring on will leave an impression in your forehead.
Also this image is of Orhan Inandi who attempted to assassinate Turkey’s Ambassador Bishkek Cengiz Kamil Firat
I’m not denying they weren’t punched, I’m not denying they have a very crude star of David on their cheek. What I am saying is that the periorbital hematoma appears to have been caused by getting hit with goggles on. The Magen David on their cheek looks as if it were cut from a razor as it lacks bruising, and is quite disproportionate to the symbol itself. I’m not saying this individual was not assaulted by the suspected individuals - just that their injuries do not match what the article is describing.
Using verbiage like “appears to” and “looks like” means you have no proof either way. You’re simply guessing rather than taking the word of a news source that is clearly Israeli - who under any other circumstances would be believed - but you can’t seem to get beyond the fact that a Palestinian might just be telling the truth.
If you wanna argue the opposite, find some facts first.