The High Court of Justice on Monday signaled that it was unlikely to order a criminal investigation into Jerusalem police officers over their handling of the inquiry into the death of Yuval Kestelman, killed in 2023 when mistaken for a terrorist, dealing a setback to his family’s effort to have the conduct investigated as possible obstruction of justice.
Kestelman, a 38-year-old attorney from Mevaseret Zion, intervened when two Hamas terrorists opened fire at the entrance to Jerusalem on November 30, 2023. He helped stop the attack before he was shot by Sgt. (res.) Aviad Frija, who allegedly mistook him for a terrorist.
Police released Kestelman’s body for burial without an autopsy. He was exhumed a week later after the military investigation determined that an autopsy was needed. The examination found a bullet and two fragments, contradicting the police’s earlier account that no bullets had been found in his body.
Kestelman’s family argues that the decision to release the body, followed by what it describes as false and changing accounts from officers involved, created reasonable grounds to suspect that police had deliberately obstructed the investigation. The state acknowledges serious professional failures but says there is no evidence they were intentional.
Justice panel urged Kestelman's family to withdraw petition
The petition concerns the conduct of the police officers who initially handled the case. It is separate from Frija’s military trial over the shooting itself.
After hearing both sides on Monday, the three-justice panel urged the family to withdraw its petition. The family declined and requested a reasoned judgment, which the court said would be sent to the parties.
Until that ruling is issued, Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara’s decision not to order a criminal investigation remains in force.
“There was negligence and unprofessional conduct, but it does not cross the threshold,” Justice David Mintz said, after the panel consulted. He added that it was “very, very difficult” to conclude that there had been criminal intent and a criminal act.
Justice Yael Willner said it was possible that the affair contained a criminal element but that such a possibility was not enough for the court to intervene.
The judges’ task, she stressed, was not to decide criminal responsibility. They were reviewing whether the attorney-general’s decision fell outside the broad discretion given to law-enforcement authorities – a threshold the panel indicated had not been met.
Kestelman's family's lawyers say evidence sufficient for criminal investigation
The family’s lawyers, Daniel Haklai and Amit Shelef, argued that the evidence went beyond poor judgment and was sufficient to justify opening a criminal investigation. They emphasized that the evidence needed to begin investigating is less than what would be required to file an indictment or secure a conviction.
Their allegations focus in part on Supt. Nadav Kogan, a Jerusalem District investigator involved in the decision to release Kestelman’s body.
The petitioners allege that Kogan had decided to release the body before receiving a CT report referring to metal fragments. They further allege that he later gave inaccurate or false accounts of consultations with doctors and the family, including an account suggesting that Kestelman’s father had opposed an autopsy on religious grounds.
The family also argued that the Justice Ministry’s Police Investigation Department (PID) had conducted an inadequate examination before deciding there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime. Its lawyers said PID did not question several potentially significant witnesses, including Military Police investigators and doctors.
'No evidence' that police deliberately impeded investigation, state says
The state acknowledged in court that releasing the body without an autopsy was a mistake and part of a series of administrative and professional failures “that should never have happened.” It said, however, that there was no evidence that officers acted deliberately to impede the investigation.
State counsel said police misunderstood the initial CT report and believed no bullets remained in Kestelman’s body. According to the state, a trauma doctor also understood police to be asking whether bullets had been removed during treatment, rather than whether any remained in the body.
The error was corrected after the body was exhumed and an autopsy was conducted on December 8, 2023, the state said.
Frija has argued in the military proceedings that the failure to conduct an autopsy before Kestelman’s burial caused evidentiary harm. The military court has not yet decided that claim or the criminal case against him.
Frija faces military trial on charges of reduced-responsibility manslaughter
According to the military indictment, Frija continued firing after another soldier called for the shooting to stop and after Kestelman raised his hands, removed his jacket, and no longer held a weapon. Frija has denied criminal wrongdoing. He is charged with reduced-responsibility manslaughter, and his trial is continuing in the Southern District Military Court.
The state said the PID, the appeals department, and the attorney-general had all reviewed the evidence and reached the same conclusion: The failures did not establish reasonable suspicion that officers intended to obstruct justice.
An internal police review led to tighter procedures, including requirements to document decisions and conversations in real time and to send bodies for forensic examination following deaths caused by trauma or other unusual circumstances, even when police do not initially suspect a crime. Prosecutorial approval is also required before a body is released following an unnatural death.
The family’s current legal challenge followed an earlier High Court ruling in December 2025, directing the attorney-general to reconsider the handling of its appeal. Baharav-Miara reviewed the matter and again declined in March to order a criminal investigation.
Moshe Kestelman, Yuval’s father, told the court that the family was seeking accountability to prevent similar failures in future cases.
“Why not investigate the officer’s motives?” he asked.
Mintz said the family’s pain was shared by the court but maintained that the legal line between grave professional failure and a criminal offense had not been crossed. With the family declining to withdraw its petition, the court will now set out its conclusion in writing.