[72585] Grunis Committee faces criticism: Brigadier General J's exonerating testimonies were omitted from the opinion

Development in the Major General Gofman affair: Brigadier General J's testimony

A first publication by Avishai Grinzaig - Updates and Yossi Yehoshua - Military and Security Updates reveals that the testimony of Brigadier General J before the Grunis Committee fully supports the version of Major General Roman Gofman. According to the reports, Brigadier General J clarified in his testimony that the purpose of his inquiry with Gofman in 2022 regarding the connection with the "Olam HaHadashot" Telegram channel concerned only the suspicion of an intelligence leak and not allegations of providing false information.

Claims of ignoring key testimonies

According to Avishai Grinzaig, during his testimony, Brigadier General J clarified that he was sent to verify whether Major General Gofman authorized anyone in Division 210 to hand over sensitive information. Brigadier General J emphasized that this was written in the memorandum at the beginning, in his affidavit, and during his conversation with Gofman. Committee member Einhorn noted during the hearing: "If I understand correctly, the question is whether sensitive, classified intelligence material was passed," to which Brigadier General J replied with a definite yes.

Despite the clarity of Brigadier General J's testimony, Avishai Grinzaig reports that the committee chairman, retired Judge Grunis, chose to ignore this context in his final opinion. The report claims that Grunis held onto the wording written in the memorandum – which is a summary rather than a transcript – and ignored the detailed explanations of Brigadier General J regarding the essence of the meeting, even though this was the central reason for the High Court of Justice judges to return the hearing to the committee.