
JERUSALEM (AP) — An Israeli district court on Monday convicted a Jewish extremist of murder in a 2015 arson attack that killed a Palestinian toddler and his parents, a case that had sent shock waves through Israel and helped fuel months of Israeli-Palestinian violence.
Join our WhatsApp groupSubscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
The court ruled that the Jewish settler Amiram Ben-Uliel hurled firebombs late one night into a West Bank home in July 2015 as a family slept, killing 18-month-old Ali Dawabsheh. His mother, Riham, and father, Saad, later died of their wounds. Ali’s 4-year-old brother Ahmad survived.
“This trial won’t bring my family back,” Hussein Dawabsheh, the toddler’s grandfather, said outside the courtroom in central Israel. “But I don’t want another family to go through the trauma that I have.”
At the time of the arson killing, Israel was dealing with a wave of vigilante-style attacks by suspected Jewish extremists. But the deadly firebombing in the West Bank village of Duma touched a particularly sensitive nerve.
The attack was condemned across the Israeli political spectrum, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged “zero tolerance” in the fight to bring the assailants to justice. Investigators placed several suspects under “administrative detention,” a measure typically reserved for alleged Palestinian militants that allows authorities to hold suspects for months without charge.
“This was an attack with racist motives,” said prosecutor Yael Atzmon. “The court ruled it as a terrorist attack and this sends an important message that terror is terror and the identity of the perpetrators is irrelevant.”

רצח
טרור
יהודי
חוננו
משטרה
מעצר
לוד
Critics, however, noted that lesser non-deadly attacks, such as firebombings that damaged mosques and churches, had gone unpunished for years. And as the investigation into the Duma attack dragged on, Palestinians complained of a double-standard, where suspected Palestinian militants are quickly rounded up and prosecuted under a military legal system that gives them few rights while Jewish Israelis are protected by the country’s criminal laws.
Ben-Uliel’s lawyers, however, claimed their client was severely tortured and that was how his confession was exacted. They did not offer evidence for their claim but said they were not surprised by the verdict and would appeal. There was no immediate word on when the sentencing would take place.
“We hope that the Supreme Court will overturn the judgment,” said Yitzhak Baum, one of his lawyers.
The Shin Bet internal security service had said Ben-Uliel confessed to planning and carrying out the attack, and that two others were accessories. It said he claimed the arson was in retaliation for the killing of an Israeli by Palestinians a month earlier.
Ben-Uliel belonged to a movement known as the “Hilltop Youth,” a leaderless group of young people who set up unauthorized outposts, usually clusters of trailers, on West Bank hilltops — land the Palestinians claim for their hoped-for state.
As the judges walked into the court, the 25-year-old Ben-Uliel sat slouched in the dock, a large white skullcap on his head and blue mask on his face, reading what looked to be a biblical text. He was exonerated of the charge of belonging to a terrorist organization.

רצח
טרור
יהודי
חוננו
משטרה
מעצר
לוד
Arabs who have murdered as many as five Jews are set free. Not one but hundreds of them. This is the Israeli self hating justice system. They cause some Jews to react when Jews are gunned down all the time. Satmar is right. The Israeli government starting from the Supreme Court and down are low lives.
He ment it לשם שמים
This piece of garbage is no different than the extremist who killed Rabin; hence, he should receive life, and never be paroled!
@boroch. he is different from the person who killed rabin. Rabin was a yid and this family was not. I am not saying what he did was good. but halachically speaking there is a big difference between killing a yid and a goy, like it or not.
I live in Israel. A number of years ago, it was discovered that there was a family feud, including arsons between two Arab families, including the victim in this case. There was no evidence against any Jew. Arabs screamed and threatened, so a scapegoat was needed.
On a practical level, if the arson was done by an outsider, they would have picked a house near the entrance that would allow for an easy escape. The property in question was deep within the village. While I don’t know this particular village, most Arab villages have very narrow streets and navigating through them is not easy and quite dangerous.
Also, it is not advisable to wish anyone harm, especially a fellow Jew.
stating the obvious: and if he’s innocent, which the FACTS seem to indicate? It wouldn’t be the first time that innocent people were scapegoated to accommodate the Arabs.