Watch the Footage: Despite State Objection, District Court Permits Detainee to Attend Brother's Wedding Supervised by Fiancée and Sister-in-Law

The court approved the request subject to a deposit of 100,000 shekels and additional guarantees. By News X Crime

A police pursuit, fleeing, and ramming police officers with a vehicle—these are the acts attributed to Nassar Shorti on which the State relied in its objection to allowing him out of detention for his brother's wedding. According to the State, the circumstances of the case demonstrate dangerousness and a significant flight risk, which do not permit settling for family supervision.

Despite the objection, the Jerusalem District Court granted the motion presented by the defense team, Attorneys Shimshon Weiss and Liraz Meir. In a decision dated September 7, 2026, Judge Mordechai Burstein permitted Shorti to leave for the wedding for four and a half hours, accompanied by his fiancée and his sister-in-law, subject to financial conditions and continuous supervision.

The ruling focused on the question of whether the dangerousness could be addressed during a brief and defined release, even while the decision to hold Shorti in detention until the conclusion of proceedings remains in place.

The Footage: The Pursuit, the Escape, and the Crash News X Crime has obtained a video described as documenting the pursuit attributed to Shorti, the escape, and the crash that occurred during it. The footage follows the incident step by step.

The escape events stood at the center of the State's arguments at the hearing. Its representative pointed to the acts described in the indictment, arguing that they show the difficulty in placing trust in Shorti and ensuring he complies with the release conditions and returns to detention.

The State: The Flight Risk Remains The State pointed to Shorti's criminal record and a suspended prison sentence subject to activation, arguing that the reasons leading to his detention have not changed. In its view, his brother's wedding does not justify the risk involved in the release.

The objection also pertained to the supervisors proposed by the defense. The State argued that their good intentions do not guarantee they can set boundaries for him or prevent flight. It further cited the Israel Prison Service's position opposing the request.

From the State's perspective, the combination of the severity of the acts attributed to him, his past, and the flight risk necessitated denying the request.

A Release of a Few Hours Requires a Focused Examination The defense team, Attorneys Shimshon Weiss and Liraz Meir, emphasized in their arguments that this was an ad hoc release for a family event, at the end of which Shorti would return to the detention center that same evening.

The defense sought to distinguish between prolonged supervision within an alternative to detention and close accompaniment for a few hours. To that end, it presented two supervisors and addressed the details of the event, including its location, the number of attendees, and the feasibility of maintaining continuous supervision.

At the same time, the defense team also disputed the weight that should be given to the intelligence information presented to the court, requesting to examine its credibility and relevance to the requested release.

The work of Weiss and Meir was characterized by focus and attention to detail: alongside the family significance of the request, a practical solution was presented addressing who would supervise Shorti, how accompaniment would be maintained throughout the event, and what would ensure his return to custody.

The Fiancée and Sister-in-Law Pledged to Stay by His Side The two supervisors proposed by the defense team were Shorti's fiancée and sister-in-law. They were questioned regarding their acquaintance with him, their understanding of the severity of the acts attributed to him, and their ability to supervise him and report any violation.

The sister-in-law pledged not to leave his side during the event and to contact police should he violate the conditions. She was also questioned about her prior supervision experience and her ability to set boundaries for him.

His fiancée testified that she is a youth probation officer in Jerusalem. She committed to accompanying him from the moment he leaves the detention center until his return, making clear that she would notify police if he attempted to flee. Her testimony was given as his partner and proposed supervisor, and not as an official report from the Probation Service.

The gender separation at the wedding was also examined during the hearing. The supervisors clarified that they would be able to stay beside Shorti in the men's section as well, ensuring that supervision would not cease during the event.

Dangerousness Can Be Mitigated During the Release Judge Burstein made clear that, as a rule, the court does not readily permit detainees to attend family events. Nonetheless, he determined that the totality of circumstances in this case justified granting the motion.

Among the considerations, he cited the fact that this is the wedding of a brother, a first-degree relative, and the significance of the event for Shorti. He also noted the brief duration of the release and that the wedding would take place before a limited audience at a hall in Beit Safafa.

Regarding dangerousness, he determined: "Although the respondent poses dangerousness, the danger posed by the respondent during his release for the wedding can be mitigated."

Regarding the intelligence material presented to him, he wrote: "The intelligence information presented to me does not indicate dangerousness or flight risk."

The judge also noted his impression that the supervisors would be capable of supervising Shorti and that he made a good impression.

Four and a Half Hours, Cash Deposit, and Guarantees The court permitted the release. Shorti was required to deposit a bank guarantee or a deposit in the amount of 100,000 shekels and sign a self-undertaking of 200,000 shekels. In addition, two third-party guarantees from the supervisors were required, in accordance with the decision.

It was stipulated that both supervisors will accompany him at all times, from his departure from the detention facility until his return to it. He was also required to report to the police upon demand and return to the detention center at the conclusion of the approved hours. A stay of exit order from the country was also imposed on him until his return.

A Precise Argument and a Framework Accepted by the Court

In the face of the State's firm opposition, the defense team, Attorneys Shimshon Weiss and Liraz Meir, succeeded in presenting a framework that the court found addressed the circumstances of the request. The combination of a focused argument, addressing supervisory difficulties, and sensitivity to the significance of the family event led to its approval under the specified conditions.

Alongside the approval, the judge emphasized that the decision was confined strictly to the circumstances of the case and does not justify a reconsideration of the detention decision. The decision also noted an undertaking by the defense not to use it in the context of such a motion.

Thus, in a case where the State underscored the pursuit, dangerousness, and flight risk, the defense team's position was accepted, allowing a brief release for the wedding under continuous supervision, substantial guarantees, and an obligation to return to the detention center that same evening.