More stories

  • in

    Netanyahu Trial Gets a Hollywood Mention From a Political Rival

    Yair Lapid, a former colleague and now nemesis of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, testified that he had been asked to help a wealthy film producer with a tax break.The leader of Israel’s political opposition, Yair Lapid, testified on Monday in the long-running corruption trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, recounting how Mr. Netanyahu had lobbied him nearly a decade ago to back tax breaks favoring an influential Israeli film producer.The claim is a small part of a yearslong prosecution in which Mr. Netanyahu is accused of granting political favors to several businessmen and media moguls in exchange for expensive gifts and positive news coverage, charges that he denies.The appearance of Mr. Lapid — once a colleague of Mr. Netanyahu’s and now his nemesis — enlivened a slow-moving courtroom process that has largely receded into the background of Israeli public life since it began with great fanfare more than three years ago.Mr. Lapid served as prime minister for several months last year, before losing power to Mr. Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving leader, in December.Mr. Lapid briefly gave evidence about two short conversations with Mr. Netanyahu in 2013 and 2014, when he served as Mr. Netanyahu’s finance minister in a coalition government. Mr. Lapid said that Mr. Netanyahu twice had raised the possibility of extending tax exemptions for Israeli citizens who had returned to the country after living abroad, a mechanism that Mr. Lapid opposed.The extension would have benefited Arnon Milchan, a producer of scores of major Hollywood films including “Fight Club” and “Pretty Woman.” Prosecutors say Mr. Milchan gave Mr. Netanyahu’s family expensive gifts, including cigars and Champagne, in exchange for political favors.According to Mr. Lapid, Mr. Netanyahu twice described the tax exemption as “a good law.” But Mr. Netanyahu did not pursue the matter beyond those two exchanges, Mr. Lapid said. The prime minister gave the impression that he simply wanted to go through the motions of asking about it so that he could tell Mr. Milchan that he had tried, Mr. Lapid added.“The whole issue was marginal in real time,” Mr. Lapid said, according to Kan, the Israeli public broadcaster. “It’s hard to remember all the details.”Mr. Netanyahu has been accused of granting political favors to businessmen and media moguls in exchange for expensive gifts and positive news coverage, charges that he denies.Pool photo by Menahem KahanaThe trial began in 2020 and will most likely not hinge on Mr. Lapid’s evidence: It is expected to last several more years and features several more accusations. Among other claims, prosecutors accuse Mr. Netanyahu of promising to pursue legislation that would create unfavorable business conditions for a newspaper owned by Sheldon Adelson, a billionaire supporter of Mr. Netanyahu and President Donald J. Trump, in exchange for positive coverage from one of the newspaper’s competitors.Many Israelis have tuned out of the day-to-day proceedings, with a large proportion having already made up their minds about Mr. Netanyahu. His supporters view the trial as a trumped-up effort to delegitimize an elected prime minister, while his critics say it should disqualify him from office.But regardless of its outcome, the trial has already caused unusual political instability. It has divided Israeli society almost equally between Mr. Netanyahu’s supporters and critics, making it difficult for either Mr. Netanyahu or opponents like Mr. Lapid to win a stable majority in Parliament. That has caused several successive governments to collapse prematurely, leading to five elections in less than four years.The trial is also at the center of an ongoing dispute about the future of the Israeli judiciary.Mr. Netanyahu’s coalition seeks to overhaul the court system, giving the government greater control over the selection of Supreme Court judges and diminishing the court’s power over Parliament. Mr. Netanyahu says the overhaul is necessary to reduce the influence of unelected judges over elected lawmakers, but his critics fear that the plan will ultimately allow him to end his trial. Mr. Netanyahu denies any such intention.Mr. Lapid’s appearance highlighted the nuances beneath the surface of Israeli politics: Though he now seeks Mr. Netanyahu’s political downfall, Mr. Lapid was once his political ally — and socialized with and briefly worked for Mr. Milchan. Under cross-examination, Mr. Lapid recounted how he interviewed Mr. Milchan in the 1990s, during his previous career as a journalist, and even joined Mr. Milchan’s production company for several months.“We remained friends after that,” Mr. Lapid said, according to Kan. “When he would come to Israel, we would meet for dinners. He is a charming man and I liked him.”But that friendship did not extend to helping Mr. Milchan with his tax, Mr. Lapid said.Gabby Sobelman More

  • in

    Ishay Ribo, Religious Pop Star, Is Winning Over Secular Israel

    The songs of Ishay Ribo, who was raised in a settlement on the West Bank, are a staple of Israeli radio. He is part of a wave of singers from religious backgrounds who are also gaining a wider audience.The singer and his songs were highly religious. His concert venue, on a kibbutz developed by secular leftists, was definitely not. His audience of many hundreds? It was somewhere in between: some secular, some devout, an unusual blending of two sections of a divided Israeli society that rarely otherwise mix.Ishay Ribo, 34, is among a crop of young Israeli pop stars from religious backgrounds, some from Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, whose music is attracting more diverse listeners, and featuring prominently in the soundscape of contemporary Israeli life.This has surprised Mr. Ribo himself.“I never imagined I’d play to this kind of crowd,” he said, backstage after the show earlier this year at Kibbutz Gan Shmuel, a town in northern Israel originally founded as a collective farm. A decade ago, he said, “This kind of crowd just didn’t really exist.”In addition to Mr. Ribo, other singers from a religious background — like Nathan Goshen, Hanan Ben-Ari, Akiva Turgeman and Narkis Reuven-Nagar — have also in recent years gained a wider audience. And their popularity reflects a changing Israeli society.Fans of Mr. Ribo at the Jerusalem Theater, where he performed in January. Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesThe religious right has expanded its influence on politics and society, escalating a clash between secular and sacred visions of the country that underlies the country’s ongoing judicial standoff. At the same time, religion has taken on a more prominent, and less contentious, role in the mainstream music scene.In less than two decades, religious singers have moved from the cultural fringe to widespread acclaim, “not only among their people, but in all Israel,” said Yoav Kutner, a leading Israeli music critic and radio presenter.“If you don’t listen to the words,” Mr. Kutner added, “they sound like Israeli pop.”Mr. Ribo is perhaps the clearest example of this shift. Forgoing the erotic and the profane, his wholesome songs are often prayers to God — but sung to pop and rock music played by his band of guitarists. “Cause of causes,” he addresses God in one of his biggest hits. “Only you should be thanked for all the days and nights.”In 2021, that track, “Sibat Hasibot,” was the most played song on Israeli radio stations, religious and secular alike.“It’s part of my duty,” Mr. Ribo said in a recent interview. “To be a bridge between these two worlds.”Mr. Ribo’s journey toward that bridging role began in the early 2000s, on the bus to his religious school.His family had immigrated from France a few years before. They led an ultra-Orthodox and ascetic life on a settlement in the occupied West Bank, just outside Jerusalem.The family did not have a television, and Mr. Ribo attended an ultraconservative Jewish seminary. He listened to music on religious radio stations — often liturgical poems sung in synagogues. He typically heard secular music only on the bus to school, playing from the driver’s radio.“I had this musical ignorance,” Mr. Ribo said.At age 11 or so, he began recording simple songs on a portable cassette player. Then as now, his lyrics were infused with piety, Mr. Ribo said. But the tunes were inspired by the mainstream singer-songwriters he’d heard on the school bus.Some four years later, Mr. Ribo bought a guitar and formed a band with another seminary student. He began to practice and dress as a Modern Orthodox Jew, forgoing the dark coats and wide-brimmed hats of the ultra-Orthodox for jeans and sweaters.But his awareness of contemporary music and its customs was still patchy. At his band’s first gig, Mr. Ribo played with his back to the audience, unaware of the need to engage with the crowd.Unlike many Israelis from ultra-Orthodox Jewish backgrounds, he paused his religious studies at age 22 to serve for two years as a conscript in the army. After finishing service in 2013, he tried to build a hybrid musical career — playing religious music to both secular and devout audiences.Mr. Ribo and his father studying the Torah in Jerusalem.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesHe imagined his melodies might sound like Coldplay, the popular British rock band, but his lyrics, he added, “would be about God and faith.”The challenge was that there were few templates then for such a crossover career.Only a few religious artists, like the folk singer Shlomo Carlebach, had built a secular following. The most successful religious artists were often those, like Etti Ankri and Ehud Banai, who had started out secular, became more devout, and then took their original audiences along with them.Mr. Ribo’s problem, initially, was that the music industry “didn’t understand what I had to offer,” he said.When he sent his music to mainstream record labels, they all turned him down.Mr. Ribo forged ahead, self-releasing the first of five albums in 2014. He hired a secular manager, Or Davidson, who marketed him as if he was a secular client — booking him to play at mainstream venues and securing him airtime on nonreligious radio stations. Gradually, his secular fan base expanded.Mr. Ribo’s 2021 hit, “Sibat Hasibot,” was the most played song on Israeli radio stations, religious and secular alike.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesIt was sometimes a fraught balancing act.Religious Jews criticized him for playing at secular concert halls. Secular Jews opposed his performances at religious venues where men and women sat separately. And when he played to both audiences at secular venues, the staff could not provide kosher food for his religious fans. Even his parents were too religiously observant to attend some of the venues.But the two-pronged approach ultimately worked. Four of his five albums were classified as gold or above — selling more than 15,000 copies in the small Israeli market. Secular pop legends, including Shlomo Artzi, began to perform duets with him, and he began to build an audience among diaspora Jews. Later this year, he is scheduled to headline Madison Square Garden, Mr. Davidson said.To an extent, Mr. Ribo’s appeal is rooted simply in the catchiness of his songs, his clean-cut demeanor and sincere performances.“Even though I’m secular, I came to watch him because he’s lovely,” said Adiva Liberman, 71, a retired teacher attending his concert at Kibbutz Gan Shmuel.“Not everyone is paying attention to the lyrics,” she added. “They’re just attracted to the melody.”The scene after Mr. Ribo’s concert at the Jerusalem Theater. His music attracts a diverse crowd of secular and religious Israelis.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesMr. Ribo’s rise comes amid not only a political shift rightward in Israel, but demographic changes as well. Religious Israelis, who have more children than secular Israelis, are the fastest-growing part of the population, allowing them to exert greater cultural influence.Daniel Zamir, an Israeli jazz star who turned religious as an adult, said Mr. Ribo’s broad appeal is part of “a bigger process of Israeli society moving toward tradition.”Simultaneously, Mr. Ribo’s rise embodies a converse but complementary trend: greater willingness among some religious musicians to cater to and mix with mainstream audiences, and greater demand among religious audiences for music with a more contemporary sound.It’s “a dual process,” Mr. Zamir said. Mr. Ribo is emblematic of “this new generation that saw that you could be religious and also make great music,” Mr. Zamir added.For some secular consumers, the rise of “pop emuni” — “faith pop” in Hebrew — has been jarring. “I am not interested in hearing prayers on my radio,” wrote Gal Uchovsky, a television presenter, in a 2019 article about the proliferation of Mr. Ribo’s music. “I don’t want them to explain to me, even in songs that brighten my journey, how fun God is.”Mr. Ribo’s latest song, “I Belong to the People,” also caused discomfort among liberal Israelis. Released in early April, it is an attempt to unite Jews at a time of deep political division in Israel. But critics said it unwittingly sounded condescending to people from other faiths, implying they were idolatrous.Mr. Ribo has also caused discomfort within the religious world. Some ultra-Orthodox Jews, particularly their religious leaders, feel he has delved too far into secular society.Early in his career, Mr. Ribo personally felt so conflicted about this that he sought his rabbi’s approval for his work. To avoid alienating his religious base, there are still some lines he refuses to cross.“I’d love to write a classic love song — but I won’t,” Mr. Ribo said. “It’s not my job or duty.”Still, some feel he has already compromised too much. In a popular sketch performed by an ultra-Orthodox comedy duo, an ultra-Orthodox man is asked if he knows any secular singers.The man pauses, then replies: “Ishay Ribo!”“I’d love to write a classic love song — but I won’t,” Mr. Ribo said. “It’s not my job or duty.”Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesGabby Sobelman More

  • in

    ‘Honorable Men’ Review: The Trials of a Prime Minister

    It would take an eight- or 10-hour mini-series to deal with all the issues this documentary raises about the legal travails of Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister of Israel.“Honorable Men: The Rise and Fall of Ehud Olmert” is a rare instance of a two-hour documentary that should have been an eight- or 10-hour mini-series, because it would take that long to clarify all the issues it raises, then present persuasive evidence. It concerns the legal travails of Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister of Israel. Olmert was under investigation for corruption when he announced his resignation in 2008. He ultimately went to prison in 2016 for bribery and obstruction of justice, but he has consistently denied doing anything criminal.The documentary, directed by Roni Aboulafia, takes a broadly pro-Olmert position. Olmert is painted as the victim of an array of vaguely conspiratorial forces: political opponents relentless in their search for dirt because they feared his positions on settlements and the peace process; witnesses overly eager to please; a particular toxic case of apparent sibling rivalry; and a legal system that had a way of proceeding under its own momentum.And that’s to say nothing of various individuals who worked with Olmert and whose actions are called into question. But was he wronged in all respects? “Honorable Men” never quite says so. Direct access to Olmert — mostly heard speaking over the phone, although he is eventually shown being interviewed in person after his release — hasn’t led to a coherent thesis.The film was first screened in 2020, meaning that recent developments — including Olmert’s November loss in a libel case to Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister again as of December — aren’t included.Honorable MenNot rated. In Hebrew, with subtitles. Running time: 2 hours. Rent or buy on most major platforms. More

  • in

    Topol, Star of ‘Fiddler on the Roof’ Onscreen and Onstage, Dies at 87

    Wide acclaim for his portrayal of Tevye helped make him, according to one newspaper, “Israel’s most famous export since the Jaffa orange.”Topol, the Israeli actor who took on the role of the patriarch Tevye, the soulful shtetl milkman at the center of “Fiddler on the Roof,” in his late 20s and reprised the role for decades, died on Thursday at his home in Tel Aviv. He was 87.His son, Omer Topol, confirmed the death. He said in an email that his father had Alzheimer’s disease, which had caused his health to deteriorate over the last year.Topol — born Chaim Topol, he used only his surname throughout much of his professional life — came to international renown heading the cast of the 1971 film version of “Fiddler.” Its director, Norman Jewison, had chosen Topol, then a little-known stage actor, over Zero Mostel, who had created the part on Broadway.The film, for which Topol earned an Oscar nomination and a Golden Globe Award, made him a star. For much of the late 20th century he would be, in the words of The Jerusalem Post in 2012, “Israel’s most famous export since the Jaffa orange.”Topol reprised Tevye in stage productions worldwide for decades, including a 1990 Broadway revival for which he received a Tony nomination. By 2009, he had, by his own estimate, played the character more than 3,500 times.His other films include “Galileo,” the director Joseph Losey’s 1975 adaptation of Bertolt Brecht’s stage play, in which he played the title role; “Flash Gordon” (1980), in which he portrayed the scientist Hans Zarkov; and the James Bond film “For Your Eyes Only” (1981), starring Roger Moore, in which he played the Greek smuggler Milos Columbo.On television, Topol played the Polish Jew Berel Jastrow in the 1983 mini-series “The Winds of War” and reprised the role for its sequel, “War and Remembrance,” broadcast in 1988 and 1989.Topol as Tevye in the movie version of “Fiddler on the Roof.” The character is a weary, tradition-bound Everyman who argues with God, bemoans his lot as the penurious father of five daughters and lives warily amid the pogroms of Czarist Russia. United Archives/Hulton Archive, via Getty ImagesBut it was indisputably for Tevye — the weary, tradition-bound Everyman who argues with God, bemoans his lot as the penurious father of five daughters and lives increasingly warily amid the pogroms of early-20th-century Czarist Russia — that Topol remained best known.“Like Yul Brynner in ‘The King and I’ and Rex Harrison in ‘My Fair Lady,’ Topol has become almost synonymous with his character,” United Press International said in 1989. Over the years, Topol was asked repeatedly whether he ever tired of playing the role.“Let’s face it, it’s one of the best parts ever written for a male actor in the musical theater,” he told The Boston Globe in 1989, when he had played Tevye a mere 700 times or so. “It takes you to a wide range of emotions, happiness to sadness, anger to love.”Throughout his many Tevyes, some critics taxed Topol’s acting as larger than life to the point of self-parody. But most praised his soulful mien and his resonant bass baritone, heard in enduring numbers like “If I Were a Rich Man,” “Tradition” and “Sunrise, Sunset.”By the time Mr. Jewison began work on the “Fiddler” film, Tevye was one of the most coveted roles in Hollywood. The Broadway show, based on stories by the Yiddish writer Sholem Aleichem — with book by Joseph Stein, lyrics by Sheldon Harnick and music by Jerry Bock — had been a smash hit since it opened in 1964. It won nine Tony Awards, including best musical, best direction of a musical (for Jerome Robbins) and, for Mr. Mostel, best actor in a musical.“The casting of it was the most agonizing thing I ever went through,” Mr. Jewison told NPR in 2001.Besides Mr. Mostel, aspirants to the screen role included Rod Steiger, Danny Kaye and — in a scenario that can be contemplated only with difficulty — Frank Sinatra.Mr. Jewison’s casting choice was all the more striking in that Topol had not wanted the part in the first place.Topol as the title character in the 1975 film version of Bertolt Brecht’s biographical play “Galileo.” Evening Standard/Hulton Archive, via Getty ImagesChaim Topol was born in Tel Aviv on Sept. 9, 1935. His parents, Jacob Topol, a plasterer, and Rel Goldman Topol, a seamstress, had fled shtetlach in Eastern Europe to settle in Palestine in the early 1930s. There, Jacob Topol became a member of the Haganah, the Jewish paramilitary organization.As a youth, Chaim studied commercial art and trained for a career as a printer. But in 1953, while he was serving in the Israeli Army, an officer overheard him regaling fellow recruits with jokes. He was placed in an army entertainment unit and found his calling there.He spent the next few years touring Israel with the group, entertaining soldiers with songs like “Sprinkler Hora,” a hit in that fledgling state, where making the desert bloom was a national imperative.Discharged in 1956, Topol settled with members of his unit on a kibbutz, where they formed a satirical theater group, Batzal Yarok (the name means “Green Onion”). Its members worked on the land two days a week and onstage for four.“It was great training because we had a very difficult, tired audience,” Topol told U.P.I. “Most of them had been out running tractors and such before performances.”He was later a founder of the Haifa Municipal Theater, where his roles included Petruchio in Shakespeare’s “The Taming of the Shrew,” Azdak in Brecht’s “The Caucasian Chalk Circle” and Jean in Eugène Ionesco’s “Rhinoceros,” a role that was originated on Broadway by Mr. Mostel. Topol’s first significant international exposure came in the title role of the 1964 Israeli film “Sallah” (also known as “Sallah Shabati”). One of the first film comedies to come out of Israel, it told the tale of a family of Mizrahi Jews — Jews historically from the Middle East and North Africa — uneasily resettled in Israel.“Sallah” won the Golden Globe for best foreign-language film; Topol, then in his late 20s, won the Golden Globe for most promising male newcomer for his portrayal of Sallah Shabati, the family patriarch, a man in his 60s.On the strength of that performance, he was asked to play Tevye in a Hebrew-language production of “Fiddler” in Tel Aviv. Unfamiliar with the show, he went to New York to see Mr. Mostel on Broadway.That, Topol, later said, was where his troubles with “Fiddler” began.“Zero was going wild” — even ad-libbing to the audience — he recalled in a 2008 interview with the British newspaper The Telegraph. “He said things like, ‘Mrs. Finkelstein, are you yawning because I’m boring you or was it because your husband kept you awake all night?’ I didn’t know what to do with myself. I telegrammed back saying there was no way I wanted to be connected to that show.”But on returning to Israel, Topol saw the Tel Aviv production and had a change of heart. He eventually replaced the actor portraying Tevye and played the role for about a year.Topol in a benefit performance in London in 2013. He was recognized for his charitable work, notably helping to found a holiday camp in Israel for ailing children from all ethnic and religious backgrounds. David M. Benett/Getty ImagesAround that time, the first London production of “Fiddler” was being cast. Someone suggested that the old Jewish actor who had played Sallah Shabati might be a worthy Tevye, and they summoned him to England. When Topol, barely 30, walked into the theater, producers thought they had invited the wrong man. But since he had made the long trip, they relented and let him audition anyway.Topol, who at the time knew “about 50 words of English” by his own account, had learned the songs phonetically from the Broadway cast album. He further impressed the producers with his ability to age 25 years simply through the rigorous control of his carriage.“At 29, I knew I had to restrain some muscles to make sure I didn’t suddenly jump in a way that destroyed the image of an elderly man,” he told The Boston Globe in 2009, in the midst of a multicity U.S. tour of the show. “I walked slower, made sure I wasn’t too erect when I danced. It was quite a job. Now, as I pass the age of 55 by 20 years, I feel totally free to jump and dance as much as I feel like.”Topol opened in London in February 1967, to glowing notices. By then he had jettisoned his first name: The English, he discovered, were flummoxed by the guttural consonant of “Chaim” and pronounced his name “Shame” as often as not.In June, with Israel fighting the Six-Day War, he left the production to return home, where he entertained the troops. (He would make a similar decision in 1991, with the outbreak of the Persian Gulf war, leaving the Broadway revival to be with his family in Tel Aviv.)After seeing the London “Fiddler,” Mr. Jewison made the unexpected decision to cast Topol, still a relative unknown in the United States, in the motion picture.“I wanted a third-generation European actor for the role, a third-generation man who understood the background,” Mr. Jewison told The Globe in 1971. “I did not want a Second Avenue version of Tevye” — a barely veiled swipe at Mr. Mostel and his unstoppable shtick.Topol, who underwent two hours of age makeup every day of the shoot — Mr. Jewison did his bit, contributing white hairs from his beard to be glued over his star’s dark eyebrows — made, in the view of many critics, a most persuasive Tevye.Reviewing the film in The New Yorker, Pauline Kael wrote of him: “He’s a rough presence, masculine, with burly, raw strength, but also sensual and warm. He’s a poor man but he’s not a little man, he’s a big man brought low — a man of Old Testament size brought down by the circumstances of oppression.”Topol married Galia Finkelstein, an actress in his army entertainment unit, in 1956. In addition to their son, they had two daughters, Adi Margalith and Anat Barzilai. All four survive him, along with two sisters, Shosh and Tova, and nine grandchildren.Topol was the author of two books, the memoir “Topol by Topol” (1981) and “Topol’s Treasury of Jewish Humor, Wit, and Wisdom” (1994).His laurels included the Israel Prize, the country’s highest cultural honor, which he received in 2015. The recognition came both for his acting and for his charitable work, notably helping to found Jordan River Village, a holiday camp in Israel for seriously ill children from all ethnic and religious backgrounds. Modeled on Paul Newman’s Hole in the Wall Gang Camp in Connecticut, it opened in 2011.Year in and year out, Topol found the role he knew best to be a source of continuing illumination.“I did ‘Fiddler’ a long time thinking that this was a story about the Jewish people,” he said in a 2009 interview. “But now I’ve been performing all over the world. And the fantastic thing is wherever I’ve been — India, Japan, England, Greece, Egypt — people come up to me after the show and say, ‘This is our story as well.’”Alex Traub More

  • in

    ‘Cinema Sabaya’ Review: Conversations and Compassion in a Small Town in Israel

    Israel’s Oscar entry is a documentary-style chamber piece about a video workshop for Arab and Jewish women whose conclusions feel, well, tired.“Cinema Sabaya,” Israel’s international feature entry for this year’s Oscars (though not nominated), looks and feels like a behind-the-scenes documentary. It’s not — the actors aren’t playing themselves and the drama is scripted. But the film resides in the porous boundary between fiction and reality, mounting a chamber piece of sorts not unlike “Women Talking,” but enriched by naturalistic flair that eschews didacticism.Dana Ivgy plays Rona, a filmmaker from Tel Aviv who is running a video workshop for Arab and Jewish women in a small town in northern Israel. The film’s director, Orit Fouks Rotem, was inspired by her mother’s participation in a similar course; she went on to organize sessions for other women, which — along with testimonies from the actors — inform her fictional rendition. In “Cinema Sabaya,” each member is given a hand-held device to complete assignments that involve capturing moments from their lives beyond the classroom. But using themselves as the grist of the mill for their training means revealing themselves as well — their struggles with tradition, sexuality, domesticity — while their homework is often blown up on a big screen and shared with the others.Discussions that double as group therapy sessions are captured with observational distance, while hand-held home-video footage punctuates these subdued symposiums, adding to the film’s documentary-style designs.Tensions arise by dint of the group’s diversity. The punchy Nahed (Aseel Farhat) is a student and nonpracticing Muslim, while Awatef (Marlene Bajali) is a septuagenarian traditionalist. The hesitant Souad (Joanna Said) is trapped in an unhappy marriage, which triggers conjugal horror stories from a divorced woman, Yelena (Yulia Tagil), and the remarried Gila (Ruth Landau).The elephant in the room is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its attendant biases, which emerge during a heated session in which the bubbly Eti (Orit Samuel), a middle-aged Jewish woman, confesses to her fear of Islamic terrorists. The workshop is ultimately a unity exercise premised on the trite axiom that conversation breeds compassion. It’s not an unwelcome reminder, and Rotem’s organic approach steers clear of icky idealism, but its conclusions nevertheless feel worn out. Talking helps, sure, but getting people in the same room is too often the stuff of fiction.Cinema SabayaNot rated. In Hebrew, Arabic and English, with subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 31 minutes. In theaters. More

  • in

    Marvel Attracts Criticism With Israeli “Captain America” Superhero

    The studio has angered many Palestinians and their supporters by casting the actress Shira Haas to play Sabra, a mutant Mossad agent, in a “Captain America” movie.JERUSALEM — It was the latest addition to a fantasy world populated by an ever-growing cast of superheroes and villains: Marvel Studios announced this past week that it had cast the Israeli actress Shira Haas to play Sabra, a mutant Israeli police officer-turned-Mossad agent, in the next installment of the “Captain America” franchise.While Jewish Israelis rejoiced at the casting of an actress from Israel as a superhero in a major Hollywood production (“Israeli Pride,” declared the Hebrew news site Maariv), the backlash among Palestinians and their supporters was swift, and #CaptainApartheid soon appeared on social media.Many critics expressed outrage about Sabra’s character and her identity as an Israeli intelligence agent, accusing Marvel of buying into Zionist propaganda; of ignoring, or supporting, Israel’s occupation of territory captured in 1967; and of dehumanizing Palestinians.“By glorifying the Israeli army & police, Marvel is promoting Israel’s violence against Palestinians & enabling the continued oppression of millions of Palestinians living under Israel’s authoritarian military rule,” wrote the Institute for Middle East Understanding, a U.S.-based pro-Palestinian organization, on Twitter.Compounding the anger was the name of the superhero, Sabra, which has different connotations for Israelis and Palestinians. To Israeli Jews, a Sabra can simply be a person born in Israel. But Sabra is also the name of a refugee camp in Lebanon where a Christian militia massacred hundreds of Palestinians while Israeli troops stood by 40 years ago.“The bottom line is that to Palestinians, Marvel having an Israeli superhero whitewashes the occupation,” said Sani Meo, publisher of This Week in Palestine, a magazine about Palestinian issues.Palestinians and their supporters around the world have been posting profusely about “Captain Apartheid,” he said. “Some of it is humorous,” he added, “though the topic is not humorous.”A 1940 sketch by Joe Simon of Captain America with a copy of a Marvel comic from the 1960s at the Library of Congress in Washington.Zach Gibson for The New York TimesMarvel Studios declined to answer detailed questions about the issue or about the company’s intentions in bringing Sabra to the big screen.“While our characters and stories are inspired by the comics,” the studio said in a statement, “they are always freshly imagined for the screen and today’s audience, and the filmmakers are taking a new approach with the character Sabra who was first introduced in the comics over 40 years ago.”Explore the Marvel Cinematic UniverseThe popular franchise of superhero films and TV series continues to expand.‘She-Hulk: Attorney at Law’: Tatiana Maslany described the giant, green character making her television debut on Disney+ as “weirdly, the closest thing to my own experience I’ve done ever.”‘Black Panther: Wakanda Forever’: The trailer for the long-awaited sequel was unveiled at Comic-Con International in San Diego. The film will be released on Nov. 11.‘Thor: Love and Thunder’: The fourth “Thor” movie in 11 years, directed by Taika Waititi, embraces wholesale self-parody and is sillier than any of its predecessors.‘Ms. Marvel’: This Disney+ series introduces a new character: Kamala Khan, a Muslim high schooler in Jersey City who is mysteriously granted superpowers.Whatever its motivations, Marvel has found itself mired in the intractable, century-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict.Israel has been vilified by international human rights groups and by boycott and divestment activists for its policies toward the Palestinians. Some of those organizations equate Israeli policy with apartheid. But the country is also gaining broader acceptance by some Arab governments, such as the United Arab Emirates, that have grown tired of waiting for any resolution of the long conflict.Simmering in the background, fierce disputes still frequently erupt in Israel and in the occupied territories over history, territory and national identity.Last year, those tensions embroiled another Israeli actress, Gal Gadot, who appears as Wonder Woman in a different superhero franchise, when she decried the continuing cycle of violence between Israel and the Palestinians. Critics assailed her for comments in which she defended Israel’s right to exist, even as she expressed support for “our neighbors.”Much of the furor over Marvel’s decision to include Sabra in the new movie, called “Captain America: A New World Order,” centers on the name of the character itself.To Israeli Jews, sabra is the Hebrew name of a cactus bush and its fruit, prickly on the outside and soft and sweet on the inside, which the nation’s founders adopted as the nickname for native-born Israelis.But to Palestinians, the sabra bush, traditionally used to mark the boundaries of village lands, is a symbol of loss and steadfastness (“sabr” is also the Arabic word for “patience”). During the war that accompanied Israel’s creation in 1948, Zionist and Israeli forces destroyed hundreds of Palestinian villages, and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians became refugees after fleeing or being expelled from their homes. But the hardy sabra bushes remained an indelible part of the landscape even after most traces of the villages were erased.Residents of the Sabra camp in Lebanon mourning those who were slain in the 1982 massacre.Jamal/Associated PressCritics have also accused Marvel of being insensitive to the link between the Israeli superhero’s name and that of the refugee camp in Lebanon. Sabra and Shatila are the names of two Palestinian camps in Lebanon where, from Sept. 16 to Sept. 18 in 1982, a Lebanese Christian militia massacred hundreds of residents. Israeli troops had allowed the militia to enter the camps, and Israeli commanders issued no orders to stop the carnage.“Social media activists are slamming Marvel over their new Israeli Mossad superhero ‘Sabra,’ whose name is sensitive considering the Sabra and Shatila massacre,” the official Palestinian news agency WAFA wrote on Twitter.The character of Sabra first surfaced in an issue of “The Incredible Hulk” comic book in 1980, wearing a blue cape and white bodysuit featuring a Star of David. That debut was some two years before the massacre in Lebanon.Yossi Klein Halevi, an American Israeli author and senior fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute, a Jerusalem-based research and educational center, said he believed that the filmmakers had not intended to reference the refugee camp when they decided to use the character.Over the course of a long conflict, like the one between the Israelis and the Palestinians, he said, “a kind of cultural paranoia sets in.”“Sometimes, a Marvel movie is just a Marvel movie,” he added.Still, critics point at how, in a 1981 Hulk issue titled “Power and Peril in the Promised Land,” the character of Sabra initially showed little emotion over the death of a Palestinian boy in an explosion, until the Hulk enlightened her about basic human values.Nothing is yet known about the story line of the next “Captain America” movie, which is scheduled for release in 2024, or the scope of Sabra’s debut role.Ms. Haas, left, on the set of the Netflix series “Unorthodox” in Berlin. One Israeli director praised her as “a brilliant actress who is relatable for her beautiful human flaws and not inhuman perfections.”Anika Molnar/Netflix/EPA, via Shutterstock’But Joseph Cedar, a New York-born Israeli director of movies including “Norman” and “Footnote,” praised Marvel’s casting of Ms. Haas, 27.A diminutive actress who has gained international recognition for her roles in the Netflix series “Unorthodox” and “Shtisel,” Ms. Haas survived cancer as a child.“I like the idea that the embodiment of an Israeli superhero is not a tall supermodel, but rather a brilliant actress who is relatable for her beautiful human flaws and not inhuman perfections,” Mr. Cedar said.Einat Wilf, a former Israeli lawmaker and author of “We Should All Be Zionists,” said that Israel was “enjoying a certain cultural moment,” with many of its local television productions finding success on international streaming platforms. “Marvel wants to make money,” she noted, adding that it appeared the studio saw the box office appeal of an Israeli superhero.Ms. Wilf said that she was withholding judgment about Sabra until the release of the movie, noting that superheroes had become more complex characters in recent years, with “a good side, an evil side, a trauma history.”“I am not so sure that an Israeli superhero will necessarily mean a positive portrayal of Israel,” she added.Hiba Yazbek More

  • in

    Who Killed Tair Rada? Inside Israel’s True Crime Obsession

    Listen to This ArticleAudio Recording by AudmTo hear more audio stories from publications like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.There is little about the limestone courthouse in Nazareth, a predominantly Arab town in northern Israel, to suggest that it would be the setting of Israel’s most-talked-about trial.Only three rows of seats make up the courtroom’s public galleries. This means that the murder victim’s mother may find herself seated directly behind the wife of her daughter’s suspected killer. The place is so ill equipped for onlookers that, should a prosecutor choose to play the defendant’s confession on video — as happened when I attended on a Sunday in March — the scrum of reporters and photographers have to strain behind her laptop to watch. The case of Tair Rada, a 13-year-old girl who was found with her throat slit in a bathroom stall of her middle school, has riveted the country almost from the moment she was killed in 2006. The murder took place in broad daylight in Katzrin, a sleepy town in northern Israel. “A ‘Twin Peaks’ story,” as one reporter who covers the trial told me. In 2010, a Ukrainian-born man named Roman Zdorov was convicted of the murder and sentenced to life in prison. But doubts about his guilt have dogged the case, furnishing material for no fewer than six prime-time investigations and as many books. Last year, a Supreme Court judge granted Zdorov a new trial. Over the past 10 months, 85 witnesses have testified. Most days, the case has dominated the headlines, often eclipsing interest in the ongoing corruption trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, the country’s former and longest-serving prime minister.Roman Zdorov at a court hearing for his retrial for the murder of Tair Rada in March.Photograph by David Cohen/Flash90Zdorov’s trial, which involves not only the mystery of a murder in plain sight but also a swirl of conspiracy theories and a grieving mother who refused to accept the police’s findings, has become a “national obsession,” as Maariv, the daily newspaper, has put it, with much of the attention focused on the defendant. Zdorov arrived in Israel from Ukraine in 2002 on a tourist visa and stayed. He is now 44, burly and impassive, with a buzz cut that accentuates a broad, square face. At the time of the murder, though, he was a scrawny 28-year-old with halting Hebrew. He worked temporarily in Rada’s school as a floorer. After the police arrested him, he protested his innocence, but a few days later he confessed to the murder twice and re-enacted it. He then recanted his confession, testifying that he had been tricked into giving it. He spent 15 years behind bars, during which time he appealed twice and lost. But public pressure kept mounting in his case — an unusual rallying behind a poor immigrant who is often described as “invisible.” He became a symbol of institutional rot, Israel’s Josef K. Zdorov is the first high-profile defendant in Israel to have his case transformed by social media. His conviction in 2010 coincided with the rise of Facebook in Israel, resulting in a digital petri dish where speculations and counterspeculations about the murder bloomed. There were rumors that the real killer was a serial rapist who escaped from prison the month before Tair’s murder. Rumors that the murder was carried out by more than two assailants. Rumors that Tair’s friends killed her. In 2013, three young filmmakers set out to investigate the various theories. Inspired by a boom in true-crime documentaries that tried to expose miscarriages of justice, their four-part docuseries, “Shadow of Truth,” portrayed Zdorov as the unwitting victim of prosecutorial overreach and offered up an alternative suspect, a woman known in the series only by her initials: O.K. She was 24 at the time of the murder and was once a student at the school where the murder took place. The series relied on testimony from O.K.’s ex-boyfriend, who described her as a sadistic and violent young woman — “somewhere between a tormented soul and a monster,” as he put it.The documentary, which premiered in March 2016, was an instant sensation. Though it was shown on a little-watched cable channel, it quickly became one of the most-viewed programs in Israeli history. On the night it aired, “shadow” and “truth” were the most-searched-for Google terms in the country. With polls showing that 51 percent of Israelis believe that the judicial system is tainted with corruption, the series tapped into broader distrust with the country’s public institutions. That May, hundreds of protesters gathered in Tel Aviv, carrying signs that said, “Today it’s Zdorov, tomorrow it’s you!” Many Israelis credit the series and the outcry it generated with the decision to award Zdorov a new trial. But legal observers have balked. Israel’s former state attorney Shai Nitzan has called “Shadow of Truth” and true-crime productions like it an “imminent danger to democracy.” He went on: “Criminal trials aren’t a reality show, where the public gets to vote by text message. Do we really want to live in a country where a person’s life, fate and liberty are decided by media polls?” Clockwise from top left: Tair Rada; Roman Zdorov; Ola Kravchenko.Photo illustration by Mike McQuade. Source photographs, clockwise from left: Courtesy of Ilana Rada; Flash 90; Yonatan Sindel/Flash 90; screen grab from News 12.The house where Tair Rada grew up in Katzrin — squat and set back from the street by a footpath of flagstones — sits in a neat, unobtrusive row of houses that make up a town of fewer than 8,000 people. It is perched in the verdant Golan Heights, a disputed area in an arresting landscape. Because of its proximity to the Syrian border, many of Katzrin’s residents are career military workers, like Shmuel, Tair’s father, who died in 2016. He and his wife, Ilana, raised three children in the house, but now Ilana is alone.On a clear wintry day in 2006, Ilana returned home from work and saw that Tair’s backpack was missing. She glanced at the kitchen and saw no trace of Tair’s having eaten, as she usually did when she got home from school a little after 2 p.m. Around 4, Ilana started to worry. Tair had dance practice that afternoon, and when Ilana called the community center where it was held, she was told her daughter hadn’t shown up for class. She called Tair, but there was no answer. This wasn’t like her, Ilana thought. Tair was always responsible. “Not an average 13-year-old,” Ilana said when I visited her at her home recently. Panicking, she called her husband, who, together with neighbors and colleagues, combed the nearby woods. As evening fell and their search yielded nothing, they decided to examine Tair’s now-empty school. There, inside the girls’ bathroom on the second level, the door of one of the four stalls was locked. A family friend of the Radas bent down and saw bloodstains and a pair of shoes. He called another friend, who hoisted himself over the stall and discovered Tair’s body, in jeans and sneakers, sprawled on the closed toilet lid. “Everything inside me was erased at that moment,” Ilana told me.An autopsy revealed that Tair was killed around 1:15 p.m., a time when the school building was teeming with teenagers. She had sustained two stab wounds to the neck, cuts to her chest and hands and several blows to the head. At least six girls later testified that they had gone in and out of the bathroom around the time of the murder but hadn’t noticed anything out of the ordinary. Gossip began to circulate about a falling-out between Tair and her girlfriends. A front-page article the next day read, “SUSPICION: KIDS MURDERED GIRL AT SCHOOL.” But the police had no leads. Residents sent them on implausible hunts, such as to a cemetery in the middle of the night, where a satanic ritual was supposedly being conducted. The police questioned everyone who worked in the school; among those interviewed was Zdorov. He had been laying tiles in the school basement, and on the day of the murder he was wrapping up a month of work there. When an investigator asked to see the clothes he wore that day, Zdorov said that he had thrown out his workpants because they were too small. He also got rid of the blade he used on his utility knife. This — and his having no alibi — raised suspicions, and Zdorov was arrested. In the interrogation room, he sat quietly and dabbed at his perspiring face with a tissue. Early on, without being asked, he volunteered that he did not commit the murder, and added that though he knew that some murders resulted from insanity, it was “not easy” to bring him to that state. The police had little to go on. There was no DNA evidence linking him to the crime scene, and there was no motive.For three days, Zdorov sat in a small cell that was occupied almost entirely by two narrow bunk beds. He became friendly with a Russian-speaking cellmate. Close to midnight, 12 days after the murder, Zdorov, worried that his cell was bugged, said aloud that he was innocent. Shortly after, he started whispering to his cellmate. “I made one mistake,” he said. “I didn’t clean the blood in the men’s toilets.” What about the knife? his cellmate asked. “There was a little bit on the blade,” Zdorov said, and he added that he washed it. Unknown to Zdorov, his cellmate, who had introduced himself as Artur, was in fact a police informant. As the two men sat on a lower bunk, Artur tried to reassure Zdorov, while at the same time grilling him for information. The strategy worked. Zdorov told him that kids at the school had taunted and cursed at him regularly. “Russian bastards,” they would say. “All your mothers are whores.” They had repeatedly unplugged his electric tile cutter and harangued him for cigarettes. He said that on the day of the murder, Tair walked by and asked him for a cigarette. He refused, and she started cursing at him. “I caught up with her and —” he indicated a slitting motion across his throat. He later turned to Artur. “Would you be able to contain yourself? When they curse your wife, your sister?” He went on: “I lost control. I swear, I won’t take on schools anymore. Or kindergartens. I don’t want to. Those kids are not educated.” “Three minutes were enough for you to finish her?” Artur asked at one point.“Less,” Zdorov replied.When Zdorov again demonstrated slitting his throat with two decisive motions, Artur asked him: “Where did you learn to kill like that?” “The internet,” Zdorov said. “I read a book, a K.G.B. introduction to knife battle.”Zdorov then leaned in and whispered in Artur’s ear: “I thought they would only find her the next day. The truth is, if I knew who she was, I wouldn’t have done it. She’s the daughter of a friend of a guy I do handiwork for, Reuven.” (Reuven Janah later confirmed this in court.) Armed with his hourlong confession, investigators questioned Zdorov again the following day. Until then he had denied any involvement in the murder, even when presented with (false) information that Tair’s blood had been found on one of his tools. Now he reversed course, giving them a detailed confession. That evening, he was driven to the school, where, handcuffed, in a plaid flannel shirt, he led investigators up the stairs, appeared to hesitate for a moment, then entered the girls’ bathroom and re-enacted the murder on a female officer. According to Israeli law, a suspect’s confession is enough to secure a conviction as long as there is an additional piece of corroborating evidence. When the case went to trial in 2007, the state prosecution pointed to several such pieces of evidence. There was Zdorov’s precise knowledge of Tair’s positioning when she was killed, and his knowledge that she had cuts on her hands and chest — details, the prosecution argued, that only the murderer could have known. He also gave investigators an accurate description of what Tair looked like that day, down to her loose hair bun held together without an elastic. He included other details in his confession that the prosecution characterized as “authentic,” such as scrubbing his wedding ring with a toothbrush to get rid of blood, or hiding his headphones under his shirt so as to “not get anything on them.” Then there was the matter of the “two voices” in his confession to Artur, implying that he wanted the police to believe one thing (that he was innocent) while unburdening himself of something else in private (that he was guilty). In 2010, Zdorov was convicted unanimously by three judges. “His testimony is riddled with lies, manipulations and inconsistencies,” they concluded. Raviv Drucker, a veteran journalist for Channel 13, has called it “one of the strongest convictions we’ve had here.”Despite Zdorov’s conviction, speculation that he was not the killer — and that perhaps the killer was someone closer in age to the victim — refused to die down. This was fueled in part by an unlikely source: Tair Rada’s mother. From the start, Ilana Rada did not accept the police’s findings that Zdorov was her daughter’s murderer. In her view, the police had been overly eager to shut the case and failed to examine all possible leads. She told me: “Did you find the murder weapon? No. Is there forensic evidence? No. You can get a confession out of anyone.” To her, there was still the possibility that Tair’s classmates were somehow involved in or knew about the murder, though the state prosecution had thoroughly ruled this out. Perhaps it was a mother’s wish: not to have her daughter’s last moments defined by a snide remark she may have said to a stranger.The belief that teenagers were involved in the murder found fertile ground online. In 2011, a man who presented himself as a private detective started a Facebook campaign that targeted a few of Tair’s girlfriends, suggesting that they were involved in the murder in posts that quickly gained traction. (He also served as an expert witness for the defense, before it was discovered that he was not a detective but an electric equipment salesman.) One of his followers was Roi Wais, now a 38-year-old dog groomer living in a suburb outside Tel Aviv, who began reading up on the murder case. “I became addicted,” Wais told me. He began sharing his thoughts on Facebook, he said, adding, “Every post I wrote got 15,000 likes!” Their theories that Zdorov had been framed soon trickled into mainstream newspapers. “Journalists called every day asking for something new, and we gave it to them,” Wais said. Azi Lev-On, an Israeli political scientist at Ariel University who researches social media, was astonished to find that among the top three Facebook groups in Israel in 2016 — a decade after the murder — was one dedicated to exonerating Zdorov. ‘He likened the various theories in the case to an image of a dress that had gone viral a few years earlier, in which everyone saw a different color.’These days, the group — “The Whole Truth About the Murder Case of Tair Rada, of Blessed Memory” — numbers some 200,000 people, the equivalent of a large Israeli city, representing a “hub of anti-establishment activity,” Lev-On noted. Its members also use the platform to call attention to other perceived instances of state overreach. For some, the interest is political: Just as Zdorov has fallen victim to an overzealous prosecution, they argue, so has Netanyahu in his corruption trial. In 2020, Netanyahu’s son Yair tweeted that Zdorov and another man who was convicted of burning the home of a Palestinian family in 2015 “are innocent!!!” In the case of Zdorov, supporters function as “semi-experts,” as Lev-On put it. On any given day, it seems, members of the group pore over court documents, debate distinctions between cuts made by serrated and smooth knife blades and crosscheck witness testimonies for possible holes. Many attend the trial and use courtroom lunch breaks to take selfies with Zdorov. They contend that the police used borderline-illegal subterfuge to gain Zdorov’s confession. No attorney, for example, was present in the room at the time of his confession (though the interrogations were all taped). When Zdorov said that he had stabbed Tair in the forearm, an investigator can be heard correcting him: “The wrist.” “Yes,” Zdorov replies. There was Zdorov’s hesitance before leading investigators to the girls’ bathroom, suggesting, his supporters argue, that he didn’t know where the crime took place and was merely trying to placate the officers. And there was the absence of his DNA inside the small stall. Perhaps most significant, his supporters believe, was a trail of bloody shoe prints on and around the toilet seat, which did not fit Zdorov’s shoe size. The prosecution successfully argued in the first trial that they most likely originated with someone from the search party or one of the paramedics. But Yarom Halevy, Zdorov’s current defense attorney, secured a new trial last year in part by sowing doubt on that assumption. Relying on testimony from the head of Israel’s National Forensic Institute, Halevy claimed that Tair’s blood dripped on those shoe prints, suggesting that they were imprinted at the time of the murder — not five hours later, when Rada’s body was found. This, Halevy asserted, meant that the shoe prints could have belonged only to the murderer himself. Or “herself,” as he ominously put it.Ari Pines, Mika Timor and Yotam Guendelman, the filmmakers of “Shadow of Truth.” Photograph by Jonathan BloomAmong those fascinated by the groundswell of support for Zdorov was a journalist and budding filmmaker named Ari Pines. In the fall of 2013, Pines was working on an article about online activism for Zdorov’s exoneration. He mentioned it to a friend, Yotam Guendelman, who ran a small film-production company, one night over drinks. Guendelman shot mostly commercials and music videos but had loftier ambitions. “Ari started telling me the story, and it became clear that every person he’d spoken to had a different theory of what had happened,” Guendelman recalled. By the end of the evening, the two friends had settled on the rough outline of a film: “You can take the same set of evidence to build different narratives and believe them,” Pines said. He likened the various theories in the case to an image of a dress that had gone viral a few years earlier, in which “everyone saw a different color.” A third friend, Mika Timor, who worked with Guendelman, became a producer on the film, which they eventually expanded into “Shadow of Truth.” (Timor declined to speak for this article.)Pines and Guendelman’s interest in true crime was sparked, as high school film students, by such productions as Errol Morris’s “The Thin Blue Line,” from 1988, which recounted the wrongful conviction of Randall Dale Adams for the 1976 murder of a Dallas police officer. They wanted to bring similar scrutiny of the criminal-justice system to Israel, to “a case that became a symbol,” Pines said.As the filmmakers started production, they came across a testimony in the police files that captivated their interest. In April 2012, a 28-year-old man named Adir Habany filed a formal complaint with the police. Habany told investigators that six years earlier, his girlfriend at the time, Ola (born Olga) Kravchenko, confessed to him that she had killed Tair. Kravchenko suffered from a psychiatric condition, he told the police, that drove her to kill people. She had recurring fantasies about a “wolf named Tahav that lives inside her and that keeps pushing her to get blood,” Habany said. On the day of Tair’s murder in 2006, he said, she called him at work that afternoon and told him that “things were going to get messy.” They were living in Katzrin at the time. Habany, who had long hair and black-framed glasses, worked as a computer technician for a nearby kibbutz. Kravchenko, with large almond-shaped eyes and a curtain of hair that fell behind her back, worked odd jobs cleaning homes and waiting on tables. In her spare time, she drew — delicate sketches of women, many of them tortured or holding guns to their heads. The opening credits of “Shadow of Truth”; Ilana Rada. Photo illustration by Mike McQuade. Source photographs: Screen grabs from YouTube and Ynet.That night, Habany said that he and Kravchenko had invited a few friends over. Conversation turned to Tair’s gruesome murder, which dominated the news. After the friends left, Habany told investigators that he had recalled Kravchenko’s portentous phone call to him earlier that day and, when they were in bed, asked her whether she was the murderer. That’s when Kravchenko confessed, according to Habany: She had disguised herself as a man, with pants that she had taken from him, a wig and a piece of fabric to “flatten her chest.” She told him that she had sneaked into the girls’ bathroom and staked it out for two hours. “And then she just killed a girl,” he told investigators, adding, “If I sound cold, it’s not because I’m cold toward it, but because that was the attitude.” The police were incredulous. Why had he waited six years before telling anyone? Why would a woman dress up as a man in order to enter a girls’ bathroom? And if she really did confess, how could he have knowingly carried on a relationship with her for six more years after that? At first, Habany dismissed the question, but a few days later he broke down and told them: “I was [expletive] scared, I’m still scared of her.” “You’re like some character out of a Turkish telenovela,” an investigator observed at one point.The police already had a convicted suspect in the case, serving a life sentence. Still, they started an investigation. For four days, they questioned Kravchenko, who denied everything Habany said, including, at first, that she harbored any violent impulses. She called his complaint a “bunch of nonsense and the petty revenge of a small man.” She unspooled for investigators a story of her own: about a nine-year relationship that had turned increasingly obsessive and violent, and that she finally managed to end the previous month. Habany raped her twice and beat her repeatedly, she said. Once, when she forgot to leave spare keys for him, he slammed her head against the wall, causing a concussion. Another time, she said, he punched her so hard in the jaw that she couldn’t chew for almost two weeks. As part of their investigation, the police seized Kravchenko’s phone, where they found over 700 messages from Habany, according to court documents, many bearing explicit threats in English following her breakup from him. “Your phone, facebook and mail were allways followed, and are now closed for you,” he texted her on March 31, 2012. “Once a slut always a slut. Wanna see our sex movies on the internet? I’ve started to work on some of them and uploading it tomorrow. Bitch.”“Enjoy your last day as a free person.”“Just dont be a coward and kill yourself or anything.”“I’m gonna trash your name and life so hard you’ll be ashamed to show your face you piece of [expletive] slut.”A week after first contacting the police, Habany was arrested for rape, sexual abuse and giving false testimony. A search on his computer yielded a document saved under the name “Confession” written earlier that year, which read like a script of what Habany told the police. It included direct references to the court ruling on Zdorov, suggesting that he had researched the case. The police held Habany in custody for 11 days. There, he confessed to raping Kravchenko once. He also confessed to beating her on about 15 separate occasions. He said the violence was part of their sadomasochistic relationship and showed no sign of contrition. Instead, he sounded indignant that the police weren’t taking his accusation more seriously. Asked why he hadn’t allowed Kravchenko to see a doctor for her injuries, he said, “Let me go hang myself in the corner and leave me alone, because I have no energy for you or anyone else’s [expletive].” They eventually released him.After the police questioned her for four days, Kravchenko left her mother’s home in Katzrin barefoot while murmuring and talking to herself. She arrived at a nearby college dorm and used a broken beer bottle to attack a man she had started seeing after leaving Habany, who had rejected her. A police van arrived. Kravchenko resisted and tried to bite one of the officers in the neck. According to the officer, she told him, “I’m hungry for the good stuff.” She was arrested and again questioned by the police.That interview shows a woman in the throes of a psychotic episode. “I woke up feeling I was in a warm place, with blood and innards all around me,” she told an investigating officer. She also divulged that she carried a knife with her that morning.“Do you have a special interest in this knife?” the officer asked. “No — in people” Kravchenko replied. “In what’s inside them.” She described herself as “starving” and said that her violent urges were increasingly hard to control. The officer asked if she had ever acted on those urges. Kravchenko told her, “I don’t want to answer.” A week later, Kravchenko was involuntarily admitted to a psychiatric hospital in Acre, in northern Israel, where she stayed for more than two years. The police investigation into Habany’s claims concluded that “there is no evidence, direct or indirect,” linking Kravchenko to Tair’s murder. In 2015, the Supreme Court, denying Zdorov’s appeal, rejected Habany’s claims. But until last year, Kravchenko’s file as a suspect in the murder of Tair Rada remained open.Two competing narratives faced Pines and Guendelman, the filmmakers, as they examined Habany’s claims. One was of a cowed man who took great risks to testify against his murderous ex-girlfriend, and a police force determined to bury his account. The other was of a woman suffering from severe mental illness, a long history of physical and sexual abuse and a vindictive ex-boyfriend who framed her for the country’s most notorious crime. Pines and Guendelman told me recently that they had been skeptical of Habany’s version, but that a “further twist,” as Pines called it, led them to believe that he was being truthful. That twist was the recollection of Anat, a woman who had become one of Kravchenko’s close friends in the psychiatric ward. Anat committed suicide in 2015. (I’m withholding her last name out of respect for her family.) In the weeks before she died, she told two of her social workers that Kravchenko had confessed to her that she had killed Tair. (Kravchenko denies telling Anat this.) The filmmakers learned about Anat’s recollection from one of her friends, who described it on “Shadow of Truth.” “As soon as we understood that there were two people who had never met — Adir and Anat — and that they both said the same story without knowing about each other, this was consequential,” Pines said. In the last episode of “Shadow of Truth,” the filmmakers aired their explosive new theory. They gave the final chapter over to Habany’s version of events. He appeared in silhouette and was identified only by his initials, A.H. In that episode, the country learned about Kravchenko — or O.K., as she was called — whom Habany, in a measured tone, described as having had the murder “very well planned.” Kravchenko used to calm herself down by imagining herself “swimming in a pool of blood,” Habany said. The filmmakers dramatized his version of events with re-enactments: a trail of blood drops, a bloodied backpack, a female hand holding a knife. They used a mug shot of Kravchenko but covered her eyes with a long black stripe, as if in a redacted report. To bolster Habany’s credibility, they interviewed his attorney at the time, who said: “I’ve known the client and his family for several years. These are normative, very trustworthy people who have no reason to make up a story that isn’t true.” As a further indictment, the series included Kravchenko’s drawings of demonic creatures and women wielding swords and guns, a visual portfolio of insanity.“Shadow of Truth” was an extravagant production, with sunset drone shots of Katzrin and a black, white and red opening montage that appeared plucked out of “True Detective.” It had all the formal trappings of the true-crime genre: floodlit talking-head interviews, a keyboard clicking out seemingly damning details — all enhanced by a menacing musical score. The effect was one of dramatic revelation.Viewers were also shown a number of Habany’s threatening text messages to Kravchenko and her accusation of rape (though not the fact that Habany had admitted to it). And the series ended with an audio recording in which Kravchenko accuses Habany of trying to “ruin my life in any way possible.” But the takeaway was clear. In interviews the filmmakers gave in 2018, when a piece of DNA evidence surfaced that many people thought backed their theory (and that was later deemed inconclusive), Pines said that he was “glad” that the version Habany told them “turned out to be true.” Guendelman said, “I think we can say with quite a bit of certainty that O.K. murdered Tair Rada.” (They later apologized for those interviews, and in others they were more circumspect.) Critics lauded “Shadow of Truth”; one called it an “exemplary and terrifying documentary.” Another review, in Haaretz, placed it at the “top of documentary productions of recent years.” A poll taken after its release found that 62 percent of Israelis believed that “O.K.” was Tair’s real murderer — not the convicted Zdorov. The series won three Israeli television academy awards, including one for Best Documentary Series. In 2017, it was licensed by Netflix in a lucrative deal and was made available for five years in 190 countries. I first met Kravchenko last November in her apartment in a cinder-block housing project in Haifa. She was driven out of a previous apartment in the northern town Kiryat Shmona four years ago, when neighbors recognized her as “O.K.,” and she spent the intervening years shuttling between family and friends. (“People with families are very nervous, they’re afraid to send their kids to school,” a woman who lived near Kravchenko in Kiryat Shmona told Channel 12 in 2018.) Kravchenko opened the door barefoot and apologized for her dirty feet. Her kitchen was full of seedlings, which she sprouts for salads. A balanced diet helps keep her schizophrenia at bay, she said. She noted that she wasn’t currently taking any medication, adding, with a smile, “Feel free to run.” I followed her to a small bedroom that she had converted into a studio. You could see the distant shoreline from the window. An easel with a still-wet canvas stood in the center of the room. It depicted a flame-haired woman, a young girl and a wolf that stared back at the viewer, appearing subdued. The woman and the wolf “guard me — or the girl,” Kravchenko explained. “It’s my subconscious — or my unconscious, rather.” In conversation, Kravchenko is measured, circumspect, unsparing in her self-analysis, with flashes of wry humor. For a long time, she refused to accept her diagnosis as a paranoid schizophrenic, she told me. “Which is how every schizophrenic person acts, by the way.”She grew up in a “difficult home,” as she put it. Her parents met as art students in Odessa, Ukraine. When Kravchenko was 3 and her sister 5, they lost both their grandfather and father to murder in a few short months. Their grandfather, a high-ranking commander in the Soviet military, was temperamental and belligerent and possibly mentally ill, Kravchenko said. He was killed when an assailant strangled him and torched his house. Ola’s mother, Tania, was suspected in the arson and spent almost a year in Soviet detention. (According to Tania, his body was exhumed, and new evidence cleared her of the murder.) Shortly after, Ola’s father’s body was found, hanging from a tree in a forest. He had been a penniless artist in St. Petersburg, “extraordinarily talented” and “hypersensitive,” according to Tania. No one knows how he died, though friends of his later told her that they had seen two men chasing him in the woods. Ola’s family moved in with Tania’s mother. Four years later, they immigrated to Israel, settling in Katzrin. Kravchenko found it hard to fit in. She worked on shedding her accent and avoided the children of other Russian or Ukrainian immigrants, who make up about a third of Katzrin’s population. She often wandered out of class, disappearing into nature. The school repeatedly called her mother to come find her. She distinctly recalls the first time she heard voices. She was 17 and driving home with her mother. “She started saying all these unpleasant things about me: that she didn’t want to drive me home, that she was tired of taking care of me, that I was always nagging.” But when Kravchenko looked over at her mother, “her mouth wasn’t moving.” Soon the voices became numerous and frequent, disguised as the voices of people Kravchenko knew well. “They were always critical of me, always nasty,” she said. “There was no telling them apart from real voices.”Around the same time, Kravchenko’s mother suggested she try meditation, and she started attending classes led by a charismatic Chilean-born guru named David Har-Zion. Kravchenko fell under his spell. After several months, she moved in with a group of his followers. She slept on a yoga mat with dozens of people in a large hall. Members were forbidden to form relationships with the outside world and were required to surrender their personal possessions to the group. For three years, she lived in “virtual enslavement,” she said. Har-Zion later fled the country, and Kravchenko found herself all at once unmoored and alone. “I had no life skills whatsoever,” she said. When she was 20, she met Habany on the streets of Tel Aviv. She was raising donations for Har-Zion’s group at a local market, and he helped his father run a clothing stall there. They began to take long walks on the beach together, smoking marijuana and talking about their pasts. He was 19, bookish and opinionated, and he impressed her with his knowledge of Hebrew literature. He confided in her that at 17 he was committed at a psychiatric institution outside Tel Aviv. (The court later indicated that this was for conduct disorder.) Rather than alarm her, this “only pulled me closer,” she told me. Within six months, she moved in with him. “I was totally his,” she said. There had been warning signs, but Kravchenko chose to ignore them. “The sex was violent, but I was drawn to it.” By 2005, Kravchenko felt increasingly isolated. Returning home from work one evening, she started talking with a group of young people who frequented a public square. They offered her vodka. The next thing she recalls, she woke up naked in her apartment, her body aching, with Habany screaming at her: “What is this? What did you do?” Kravchenko doesn’t know the person who raped her or remember much about that evening — “I have flashes of the guy,” she told me — but when Habany saw her, he kicked her in the head and stomach, dragged her into the bathtub and urinated on her. Habany later told investigators that he “peed on her,” because he “felt like it.” An investigator drilled into this: “Your partner, your lover … was raped according to you by another man, and you peed on her?” Habany told him, “It’s my personal business — not yours.”After that night, Kravchenko said, Habany became obsessed with her whereabouts. He didn’t allow her to socialize or go out without him to any place except work. “I didn’t realize that I was being abused,” she told me. “I still wanted to marry him, have children with him.” In 2006, they ran out of money to pay rent and had to move in with Kravchenko’s mother, in Katzrin. Tania was concerned about how Habany treated Kravchenko and tried to warn her daughter. But by then, Kravchenko had lost her sense of self. In a sketchbook from that time, she drew a woman warrior with a sword entering her private parts. “I even bought myself a dog collar,” she said. Ola Kravchenko in her studio outside Odessa, Ukraine.Courtesy of Ido HaarKravchenko doesn’t remember much about the day of Tair’s murder that December. She was home, she thinks, between shifts at the restaurant where she worked. When I asked her why she thought Habany later made this particular allegation against her, she said: “Because it was ready-made. It didn’t take much imagination. I was in Katzrin, the case was talked about, all the details were online.” The murder ignited something in Kravchenko. “Every violent act that happened in the country, I would feel a certain pressure,” she told me. For years, she had sensed a lupine presence around her. “Sometimes it was the sensation of fur on the skin, sometimes a feeling of warmth.” One night in 2007, Habany raped Kravchenko, pinning her arms behind her back in the bath as she cried for him to stop. Habany confirmed this to me. “Yes, there was this time in 2007 where I misinterpreted our sexual games,” he wrote in an email. (Although in 2012 he had admitted to raping her, Kravchenko later learned that the case against him was closed in 2014 with no prior notification, because she was seen as mentally unfit to testify against him.) After that night, Kravchenko says that she started regularly imagining a female wolf, whom she called Tahav (“moss” in Hebrew). “I didn’t see her, but I felt her — all the time,” Kravchenko said. The wolf “made me think thoughts that weren’t my own. But they clashed with who I am fundamentally — I am not a violent person — so it was a constant internal struggle to resist this force that wanted violence.” She tried to kill herself several times. Her forearms are lined with scars.The more Habany grew possessive of her, the more she grew indifferent. “He didn’t interest me anymore,” she said. They had saved enough money and moved back to Tel Aviv, where Kravchenko found work at an arts supply store. In early 2012, “I remember this sudden understanding that it’s not forever, that I can leave,” she said. Daniel Shriki, who worked with Kravchenko at the store, recalls her saying that she was going to break up with Habany “and seeming really frightened.” Shriki says that after the breakup, Habany would often come to the store unannounced “and start threatening her.” Kravchenko had planned to go abroad to visit her sister, who was then living in Florida. But that March, Habany texted: “Forget all about planes.” Three weeks later, he went to the police and accused her of murdering Tair. Kravchenko acted on her violent thoughts once, she says: in her beer-bottle attack of the man who rejected her. On “Shadow of Truth,” that attack was used to show a pattern of aggression and to substantiate Habany’s claim that Kravchenko staked out Tair. But such types of aggression are not comparable, Daniel Levy, a psychiatrist who has treated patients with schizophrenia, told me. One is disassociated and spontaneous; the other organized, premeditated. Yotam Wax, an Israeli filmmaker who has spoken out in support of Kravchenko, told me, “We’re supposed to believe that she’s both crazy and out of control and this Mossad hit-woman?” Kravchenko’s darkest fantasies involved using a knife to cut and enter a person’s body, she told me. “I wish my psychoses were softer,” she said. “I would suffer less.” But even at her most mentally unstable, her violent imagery had always involved large men, in whose bodies she imagined enwrapping herself — never children, she said. Yet in conjuring the image of Tahav to the police, Habany exploited Kravchenko’s deepest fears about herself. Efrat Harel-Haiman, a clinical psychologist who treats victims of abusive relationships, calls this tactic “emotional espionage.” Abusive partners “often take perverted pleasure in learning your innermost thoughts, remembering everything you tell them and then using it against you,” she told me. “It’s textbook.”Twice during our three-hour conversation in her home that day, Kravchenko’s voice faltered. Once, when she described Habany’s reaction after she was raped in Tel Aviv. The second was when she mentioned having watched, the previous night, a docuseries on Netflix called “Don’t F**k With Cats.” “Have you watched it?” she asked me. I had. The series details the search of internet activists for the person who had posted videos of himself torturing and killing kittens. Halfway through the first episode, the series describes an incident I had since forgotten. For some time, the activists thought that they had found the cat killer, but it turned out to have been a case of mistaken identity. The person they wrongfully accused had a history of depression; he later committed suicide. In the series, this is presented as one of many plot twists. To Kravchenko, however, this was something else. “They took his life,” she said, her eyes welling. “It could have been me.”In 2013, just as Pines and Guendelman were embarking on their series, Kravchenko, who was still in the psychiatric ward, received a Facebook message from a woman whose initials are E.B. (Her full name is being withheld because of a gag order related to legal action against her.) Kravchenko said E.B. introduced herself as a private investigator working on the Tair Rada case, and included a link to a newspaper article about Kravchenko’s arrest the previous year. “She kept trying to solicit information,” Kravchenko told me. “She was totally obsessed.” Kravchenko found E.B.’s insistence strange, but she felt extremely lonely. “I thought of her not as a friend but as someone who cares and whom it’s nice to sometimes talk to.” They exchanged frequent text messages, talking about art and dating. Occasionally E.B. steered the conversation to Tair’s murder. The police were no longer actively investigating Kravchenko, who was deemed mentally unfit to stand trial. Though her police file was still open then, Kravchenko said that she wasn’t worried when E.B. pried into her case: “I had no suspicion that she had an agenda.” E.B. told Kravchenko that she had met Habany and added that she didn’t know whether to believe him. Over many months, E.B. listed names and specific details about people with whom Kravchenko was hospitalized, in an attempt to draw her out — details that were strictly confidential. “I didn’t understand how she knew these things,” Kravchenko said. What Kravchenko didn’t know was that E.B. was a hard-core activist working to free Zdorov, and had taken up work as an administrator at the hospital where she was a patient. E.B. left the job after eight months, in July 2014 — the same month that Kravchenko was released. (E.B., in a sworn deposition for a civil suit that Kravchenko brought against her, confirmed that she had worked at the hospital; in a TV interview, she also confirmed that she hid this fact from Kravchenko.) During that time, E.B. had access to all of the ward’s medical records and personnel files. Kravchenko showed me messages from three former patients there who told her that E.B. had repeatedly called them and tried to persuade them that Kravchenko was Tair’s killer. One former patient said in written testimony that E.B. had introduced herself to him as a relative of Tair’s. “When I refused to talk about Ola, she started threatening me in all kinds of ways,” the patient, Motti (whose last name I am withholding because he is still a patient), recounted. “She said that I was cooperating with a murderer,” he went on. (In her deposition, E.B. denied ever contacting any patients from the hospital.) Kravchenko now believes that E.B. had likewise gotten to Anat — her deceased friend who said that she had confessed to the murder — and persuaded Anat of Kravchenko’s guilt. Indeed, E.B. sent messages to Kravchenko indicating that she knew Anat personally. (“She had lost so much weight,” she said of Anat shortly after her suicide.) But she denied ever contacting Anat and declined to comment for this article. That August, she texted Kravchenko: “Did they approach you?”“About what?” Kravchenko replied.“A movie,” E.B. wrote back. She told Kravchenko about Pines and Guendelman and said that they were making a documentary about Tair’s murder. She was taking part in the series, she said, and urged Kravchenko to do the same. “It’s important they hear what you have to say,” she texted Kravchenko. In fact, E.B. was helping the production team and had arranged for Pines and Guendelman to interview two of Tair’s classmates. Pines told me that they did not know at the time that E.B. worked at the psychiatric hospital where Kravchenko was being held, but two former patients there told Kravchenko that Pines had reached out to them after E.B. gave him their information. That summer, E.B. arranged a meeting between Kravchenko and the filmmakers at a cafe in Haifa. Kravchenko was living in rehabilitation housing then, making less than a dollar an hour gluing stickers onto newspapers. She came to the meeting accompanied by a fellow patient she had started seeing romantically. The filmmakers “sit there with their gleaming shirts and their pampered beards and their watches,” she recalled. “I came dressed in a stained, ripped shirt. I was miserable.” She also had a knife in her bag — a fact that Pines and Guendelman discovered only later. Kravchenko told me that the knife wasn’t her idea. When she had told the man she was seeing about her meeting with the filmmakers, “He said that he would come with me, and he put a bread knife in my bag,” she said, adding, “It was stupid.” (Reached for comment, the man, who told me that he later served time in prison and had “problems of my own,” denied her account but refused to elaborate.) Pines and Guendelman asked to interview her on camera. Kravchenko demurred. “They were nice, polite, quiet,” Kravchenko told me. “But Ari said, ‘We think you might have done it.’” (Pines disputed this, saying that he and Guendelman had come to the meeting with an open mind.) The next day, they texted her and proposed a meeting without E.B. Again, she refused. “And that’s the last I’ve heard,” she said. Outside the hospital, Kravchenko struggled, she told me. She told her psychiatrist that she was having homicidal thoughts and had prepared a knife and gloves to kill her neighbor. “She says that until now she has contained herself, but only barely,” the psychiatrist wrote in 2014. She was recommitted to the hospital.By the time the series aired, a year and a half later, Kravchenko was faring better. She received a scholarship to attend the Tel-Hai Arts Institute in the Galilee and excelled, becoming the college’s top-ranked student. Gal Shahar, an instructor there, told me, “Her sketching and drawing abilities were incredible, and she also became a driving force” — helping other students with their presentations. “It was the best period of my life,” Kravchenko recalled. But one night, Kravchenko received a call from a college friend. “Ola, be strong,” he said. “I just saw a series — it said that you’re a murderer.” Kravchenko hung up quickly and searched for the series on her television’s digital recorder. “I saw my picture, I saw Adir, I saw details about my rape,” she recounted. “They built a nightmare. A demon. Something from fairy tales. Is there anything worse than a child murderer?” Almost overnight, Kravchenko’s identity was revealed and widely circulated online. “The name O.K. is the latest demon to rock the country and the internet,” one commentator wrote in 2016. A group of men in Kiryat Shmona, where Kravchenko lived in student housing, stalked her apartment. Whenever she ventured out, they would curse and spit at her. Her initials became synonymous with unspeakable evil. “When my daughters hear the name O.K., they hide under the sofa,” Rinat Klein, the head of Channel 8, which first aired “Shadow of Truth,” told a radio interviewer in 2018. (“We had no intention of hurting anyone,” Klein told me recently. “We never imagined this would be the most-talked-about series in Israel.”) Messages poured into Kravchenko’s Facebook account.“I hope you die you whore!”“You can’t even be compared to a human being, you filthy and despicable murderer!” “If the police won’t do its job, I will.”“I’ve never seen such mass hysteria in my life,” Zemer Sat, then the director of the Tel-Hai Arts Institute, told me. Possibly recognizing Kravchenko’s drawings in the series, students called for the school to expel her. Sat saw it as his job to protect Kravchenko. He held meetings with students and staff, pleading with them not to be manipulated by the series. “Here was this good and hardworking student, and the whole world and its sister were treating her as an existential threat,” he said. The faculty stood by Kravchenko, and life on campus more or less resumed (though some female students were still afraid to go to the restroom alone). But the fallout from the series had unsettled her, and increasingly she retreated into her inner world. She took to carrying around a doll in a basket and treating it as her baby, Shahar, her instructor, recalled. During class, she would spread a blanket for the doll to play on or “say that her baby was crying.” All the while, Kravchenko produced her best work, Shahar noted with admiration. “At a time in which her schizophrenia was at its most pronounced, she blossomed.” But she continued to suffer from frequent psychotic episodes and had another brief spell at a psychiatric hospital. In 2017, Kravchenko texted a friend that she had taken 28 pills of the anti-anxiety medication oxazepam, then lost consciousness. Her friend called Kravchenko’s mother, who rushed to her bedside. After Kravchenko’s recovery, she bought a one-way ticket to Odessa and stayed with her grandmother. Pines predicted in a television interview that she wouldn’t be returning to Israel.Ola Kravchenko.Photo illustration by Mike McQuade. Source photographs, from top: Somchok Kunjaethong/EyeEm/Getty Images; courtesy of Ido Haar; Peter Dazeley/Getty Images.Shortly before she left Israel, a man named Ido Haar reached out to Kravchenko. “I watched ‘Shadow of Truth,’ and I felt ill,” Haar told me. A filmmaker living in Tel Aviv, he had spent several years working at a psychiatric institution outside Jerusalem and has seen people closest to him struggle with mental illness. He and Kravchenko arranged to meet. “She was suspicious, closed off, frightened,” he said. Still, he stayed in touch and later came to visit her in Odessa. After several months, when her mental health improved, she returned to Israel. She had kept in touch with Haar and agreed to be filmed. Last year, Haar’s film, called “Heavy Shadow,” was aired. Its emphasis was personal, its tone muted. There were no cliffhangers or dramatic plot twists, no teasing voice-overs. In quiet, mostly domestic settings in both Odessa and Katzrin, Kravchenko gave a nuanced portrait of life with mental illness. “I feel like I’m a rip in reality,” she is heard saying. “Through that rip pass gods, demons, creatures. One of them was a wolf named Tahav. People said that she was insanity, that she was scary. But she’s not. She was the only one who helped and protected me.”Haar believes that the collective reckoning over treatment of marginalized groups in popular culture has yet to apply to those with mental-health issues. “I am perhaps overly sensitive to the formulation of the ‘crazy violent person,’” he said. He blamed the lure of global streaming platforms for making some documentary filmmakers choose “snufflike sensationalism” over precision. “Everyone wants Netflix, and some are willing to do anything for it, even at the expense of someone’s life,” he said. “If there’s a thirst for blood, it comes not from the mentally ill but from creators who exploit it.” Many Israelis who had become convinced by “Shadow of Truth” that Kravchenko was Tair’s killer reconsidered after “Heavy Shadow” came out. Kravchenko recalls the film’s release, on Israel’s Channel 11, as akin to a cosmological event. “From one hour to the next, the world turned on its axis,” she said. She watched it with Haar and several friends at his home. They had sushi and pizza. When she left that night, one of Haar’s neighbors recognized her on the stairwell. This used to portend trouble. Instead, the woman “gave me a hug that has stayed with me since,” Kravchenko said.After 10 months of twice-weekly hearings, the retrial of Roman Zdorov is winding down. Over the next two months, each side will make its closing arguments. Yarom Halevy, Zdorov’s attorney, has made Kravchenko into the linchpin of his defense. He is a ruthless litigator, considered one of the top criminal-defense lawyers in Israel. In 2018, a hair found on Tair’s body was shown to be a match for Habany’s mitochondrial DNA (which is matrilineal), setting off a frenzy of speculation online and in the press. Halevy pounced, arguing that this corroborated the claim that Kravchenko wore Habany’s clothes when she murdered Tair. Two days later, Israel’s National Forensic Institute clarified that the findings were important but inconclusive. According to the institute’s report, the hair could belong to “up to tens of thousands of people.” But this didn’t stop Halevy from repeatedly going on radio and TV to call Kravchenko a “serial killer.” When I spoke to Halevy in his Tel Aviv office recently, I asked him whether, as a defense attorney, he thought that Kravchenko deserved a presumption of innocence, much as his client did. “No,” Halevy said, because the prosecutors’ office are “frauds” who would never mount a case against her. His voice rose: “I wish one day she would commit murder, and everything will come out!”In January, Halevy summoned Kravchenko to the Nazareth courtroom for cross-examination in a closed hearing. In response, one of Kravchenko’s attorneys, Daniel Haklai, asked for an advocate for sexual-assault victims to be present in court with her. “Sexual-assault victims,” Halevy sneered.“Yes,” Haklai replied. “Then I want to have a representative from the S.&M. community on behalf of” Habany, Halevy said. One of the judges warned Halevy not to mock the situation. “I will mock,” he later told him.Kravchenko arrived at her court hearing wearing a black overcoat and shaking. She took up her position behind the witness box. A swarm of photographers descended on her. Zdorov, who is currently under house arrest pending his verdict, sat near the door and looked on placidly. Kravchenko’s mother waited outside the courtroom. “My baby is being hurt, and I can’t do anything about it,” she said through tears.On the day of Zdorov’s cross-examination two months later, I met Ari Pines and Yotam Guendelman at their production studio, in a modest building in an industrial part of Tel Aviv. The filmmakers kept checking their phones for updates. Both wore beards and the exact same blue button-down shirt. Guendelman, who is 36, is fast-talking and laid back; Pines, 34, is slight and intense and projects a nervous energy. They sounded eager to draw attention back to Zdorov and away from Kravchenko, who, it was announced last year, is suing them for libel over statements they made in interviews. “As far as we’re concerned, the series still ended with a question mark,” Guendelman said. When I asked why, if that were the case, two-thirds of the country believed that Kravchenko was Tair’s killer, tensions between them soon became palpable. While Pines seemed to relish going over supposed inconsistencies in Kravchenko’s statements to the police, Guendelman sounded uneasy. “I don’t think we should be focusing on this,” he told Pines. Then he turned to me: “We’re in a complicated situation right now as creators because we were attacked for something and are trying to defend it.” He went on: “What’s our border as creators? The creators of ‘Euphoria’ didn’t expect teenagers to smoke crack in the bathroom. You don’t always know. And sometimes the impacts can be good and sometimes bad, and you don’t know which way it would go.” Kravchenko’s being treated as a “murderer — that’s the last thing we wanted.” Pines grew restless. “Does that mean that we can’t publish what we know? Does it mean that we can’t do investigative reporting because people might expose the identity of people you are trying to mask, and give them a field trial?”“There’s no answer,” Guendelman said philosophically. “We tried to get an interview with O.K. for a really long time.”“We also met her,” Pines said. “A meeting in which —”“Don’t, it’s not relevant —” Guendelman said.“A meeting in which she later said she came with a knife.”“That’s not relevant,” Guendelman said.“It is,” Pines countered. They admitted that they wanted to move on from this case. But every day seemed to bring fresh headlines. In July, another hair from the crime scene was shown to match Habany’s mitochondrial DNA — this time using technology that narrowed the pool of potential matches to somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 people, Shai Carmi, a population geneticist from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, told me. The judge described the finding as “not a tiebreaker.” Still, several media outlets in Israel reported on the evidence as though it directly implicated not Habany but Kravchenko. Ilana Rada’s theory of who killed her daughter has changed over time. After “Shadow of Truth” came out, she didn’t know whom to believe. But when I interviewed her in February, after Kravchenko’s testimony, Ilana said that Kravchenko was a victim and called Halevy’s attacks on her “irresponsible, immoral.” This summer, though, after news broke of the possible DNA match between the hair and Habany, Ilana called on the state prosecutor to have him and Kravchenko arrested. Asked if she thought that one of them committed the murder, she said yes, then surprised many: “A.H.” — in other words, Habany. (Habany has denied any involvement in the murder and has never been named a suspect. Cellular data indicated that he was at work on the day of the murder, some 12 miles from the crime scene.)In all this time, Ilana seems to have rarely considered the possibility that the killer was Zdorov. Yet, as Zdorov’s testimony kept shifting in court — when he was caught in a recent lie, the presiding judge asked him, “Why should we believe you?” — it was difficult not to wonder whether she might be unknowingly fighting to exonerate her daughter’s killer. “Every day that I don’t talk about Tair or her murder, I sink,” Ilana told me. Pines and Guendelman are currently at work on a new episode of “Shadow of Truth.” It will focus on Zdorov’s retrial and is expected to air after his verdict is handed down this fall. Legal observers who watch the trial closely say that an exoneration appears likely based on reasonable doubt — marking an extraordinary turn. If so, “Shadow of Truth” will have crossed over from the screen to reality. For Kravchenko, however, it already has. In “Heavy Shadow,” she recalled a visit with family friends last year, during which she chatted with the friends’ 7-year-old daughter. “I told her that she had a pretty crown and that she was lucky,” Kravchenko said. The girl offered to show Kravchenko her crown collection and led her to her room, but soon the girl’s older sister came to check on them. Kravchenko sensed her suspicion and left. “My heart was in my stomach,” Kravchenko said. “I understand that children need protection, of course. But from me?” This spring, Kravchenko finished writing and illustrating a children’s book. It tells the story of a girl from a strange planet who, in order to cure an ailing queen, gives away what little she has: her tears, her light, her song. As it was originally written, the girl never returns home at the end. But when I saw Kravchenko in June, she was debating whether to change it. She placed a sofa cushion on her lap and hugged it. “It’s a hard choice between a happy ending and a real one,” she said.Ruth Margalit is a writer living in Tel Aviv. Her articles have appeared in The New Yorker and The New York Review of Books, among other publications. She last wrote for the magazine about the parenting expert Harvey Karp. Mike McQuade is an American graphic artist living in Virginia known for his collage work. His work has been recognized by the American Institute of Graphic Arts, American Illustration, Communication Arts and the Art Directors Club of New York. More

  • in

    Nazi Tapes Provide a Chilling Sequel to the Eichmann Trial

    Sixty years after the execution of Adolf Eichmann, the logistics chief of the Holocaust, an Israeli documentary airs his confessions in his own voice.TEL AVIV — Six decades after the historic trial in Jerusalem of Adolf Eichmann, one of the chief engineers of the Holocaust, a new Israeli documentary series has delivered a dramatic coda: the boastful confessions of the Nazi war criminal, in his own voice.The hours of old tape recordings, which had been denied to Israeli prosecutors at the time of Mr. Eichmann’s trial, provided the basis for the series, called “The Devil’s Confession: The Lost Eichmann Tapes,” which has generated keen interest in Israel as it aired over the past month.The tapes fell into various private hands after being made in 1957 by a Dutch Nazi sympathizer, before eventually ending up in a German government archive, which in 2020 gave the Israeli co-creators of the series — Kobi Sitt, the producer; and Yariv Mozer, the director — permission to use the recordings.Mr. Eichmann went to the gallows insisting that he was a mere functionary following orders, denying responsibility for the crimes of which he had been found guilty. Describing himself as a small cog in the state apparatus who was in charge of train schedules, his professed mediocrity gave rise to the philosopher Hannah Arendt’s theory of the banality of evil.The documentary uses re-enactments of gatherings of Nazi sympathizers in 1957 in Buenos Aires.Itiel Zion courtesy of Kan 11The documentary series intersperses Mr. Eichmann’s chilling words, in German, defending the Holocaust, with re-enactments of gatherings of Nazi sympathizers in 1957 in Buenos Aires, where the recordings were made.Exposing Mr. Eichmann’s visceral, ideological antisemitism, his zeal for hunting down Jews and his role in the mechanics of mass murder, the series brings the missing evidence from the trial to a mass audience for the first time.Mr. Eichmann can be heard swatting a fly that was buzzing around the room and describing it as having “a Jewish nature.”He told his interlocutors that he “did not care” whether the Jews he sent to Auschwitz lived or died. Having denied knowledge of their fate in his trial, he said on tape that the order was that “Jews who are fit to work should be sent to work. Jews who are not fit to work must be sent to the Final Solution, period,” meaning their physical destruction.“If we had killed 10.3 million Jews, I would say with satisfaction, ‘Good, we destroyed an enemy.’ Then we would have fulfilled our mission,” he said, referring to all the Jews of Europe.Kobi Sitt, the producer of the documentary, in the Jerusalem auditorium that served as a courtroom for Adolf Eichmann in 1961.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York TimesMr. Mozer, the director, who was also the writer of the series and himself the grandson of Holocaust survivors, said, “This is proof against Holocaust deniers and a way to see the true face of Eichmann.”“With all modesty, through the series, the young generations will get to know the trial and the ideology behind the Final Solution,” he added.The documentary was recently screened for commanders and officers of the intelligence corps — an indication of the importance with which it has been viewed in Israel.Mr. Eichmann’s trial took place in 1961 after Mossad agents kidnapped him in Argentina and spirited him to Israel. The shocking testimonies of survivors and the full horror of the Holocaust were outlined in gruesome detail for Israelis and the rest of the world.The court had a wealth of documentation and testimony on which to base its conviction of Mr. Eichmann. The prosecution had also obtained more than 700 pages of transcripts of the tapes recorded in Buenos Aires, marked up with corrections in Mr. Eichmann’s handwriting.But Mr. Eichmann asserted that the transcripts distorted his words. The Supreme Court of Israel did not accept them as evidence, other than the handwritten notes, and Mr. Eichmann challenged the chief prosecutor, Gideon Hausner, to produce the original tapes, believing they were well hidden.Mr. Eichmann in court in 1961. He went to the gallows insisting that he was a mere functionary following orders, denying responsibility for the crimes of which he had been found guilty.GPO via Getty ImagesIn his account of the trial, “Justice in Jerusalem,” Mr. Hausner related how he had tried to get hold of the tapes until the last day of Mr. Eichmann’s cross-examination, noting, “He could hardly have been able to deny his own voice.”Mr. Hausner wrote that he had been offered the tapes for $20,000, a vast sum at the time, and that he had been prepared to approve the expenditure “considering their historical importance.” But the unidentified seller attached a condition that they not be taken to Israel until after the trial, Mr. Hausner said.The tapes were made by Willem Sassen, a Dutch journalist and a Nazi S.S. officer and propagandist during World War II. Part of a group of Nazi fugitives in Buenos Aires, he and Mr. Eichmann embarked on the recording project with an eye to publishing a book after Mr. Eichmann’s death. Members of the group met for hours each week at Mr. Sassen’s house, where they drank and smoked together.And Mr. Eichmann talked and talked.After Mr. Eichmann’s capture by the Israelis, Mr. Sassen sold the transcripts to Life magazine, which published an abridged, two-part excerpt. Mr. Hausner described that version as “cosmeticized.”Yariv Mozer, the director of the documentary. “This is proof against Holocaust deniers and a way to see the true face of Eichmann,” he said.Rob Latour/ShutterstockAfter Mr. Eichmann’s execution in 1962, the original tapes were sold to a publishing house in Europe and eventually acquired by a company that wished to remain anonymous and that deposited the tapes in the German federal archives in Koblenz, with instructions that they should be used only for academic research.Bettina Stangneth, a German philosopher and historian, partially based her 2011 book “Eichmann Before Jerusalem” on the tapes. The German authorities released just a few minutes of audio for public consumption more than two decades ago, “to prove it exists,” Mr. Mozer said.Mr. Sitt, the producer of the new documentary, made a movie for Israeli television about Mr. Hausner 20 years ago. The idea of obtaining the Eichmann tapes had preoccupied him ever since, he said. Like the director, Mr. Mozer, he is an Israeli grandson of Holocaust survivors.“I’m not afraid of the memory, I’m afraid of the forgetfulness,” Mr. Sitt said of the Holocaust, adding that he wanted “to provide a tool to breathe life into the memory” as the generation of survivors fades away.He approached Mr. Mozer after seeing his 2016 documentary “Ben-Gurion, Epilogue,” which revolved around a long-lost taped interview with Israel’s founding prime minister.The German authorities and the owner of the tapes gave the filmmakers free access to 15 hours of surviving audio. (Mr. Sassen had recorded about 70 hours, but he had taped over many of the expensive reels after transcribing them.) Mr. Mozer said that the owner of the tapes and the archive had finally agreed to give the filmmakers access, believing that they would treat the material respectfully and responsibly.Visitors at the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum and Memorial in 2019. Mr. Eichmann said on the tapes that he “did not care” whether the Jews he sent to Auschwitz lived or died.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesThe project grew into a nearly $2 million joint production between Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer; Sipur, an Israeli company formerly known as Tadmor Entertainment; Toluca Pictures; and Kan 11, Israel’s public broadcaster.A 108-minute version premiered as the opening movie at the Docaviv film festival in Tel Aviv this spring. A 180-minute television version was aired in three episodes in Israel in June. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer is looking for partners to license and air the series around the world.The conversations in Mr. Sassen’s living room are interspersed with archival footage and interviews with surviving participants of the trial. The archival footage has been colorized because, the filmmakers said, young people think of black-and-white footage as unrealistic, as if from a different planet.Prof. Dina Porat, the chief historian of Yad Vashem, Israel’s official Holocaust memorial, said that she had listened to the Eichmann trial “from morning till night” on the radio as a 12th grader.“The whole of Israeli society was listening — cabdrivers were listening, it was a national experience,” she said. Professor Porat said that the last major Holocaust-related event in Israel was probably the trial of John Demjanjuk in the late 1980s and his subsequent successful appeal to the Israeli Supreme Court.The venue in Jerusalem where Mr. Eichmann was tried. Even without the tapes, the court had a wealth of documentation and testimony on which to base his conviction.Avishag Shaar-Yashuv for The New York Times“Each few decades you have a different type of Israeli society listening,” she noted. “The youth of today are not the same as in previous decades.”The documentary also examines the interests of the Israeli and German leaderships at a time of growing cooperation, and how they might have influenced the court proceedings.It asserts that David Ben-Gurion, the Israeli prime minister at the time, preferred the tapes not to be heard because of embarrassing details that could emerge regarding a former Nazi who was working in the German chancellor’s bureau, and because of the divisive affair of Rudolf Kastner, a Hungarian Jew who helped many Jews to safety but was also accused of collaborating with Mr. Eichmann.Hearing the tapes now, the unambiguous confessions of Mr. Eichmann are startling.“It’s a difficult thing that I am telling you,” Mr. Eichmann says in the recording, “and I know I will be judged for it. But I cannot tell you otherwise. It’s the truth. Why should I deny it?”“Nothing annoys me more,” he added, “than a person who later denies the things he has done.” More