Ofarim case: authorities see no reason for investigation

The Leipzig public prosecutor's office sees no reason for new investigations in the Gil Ofarim case. There is "no reason to pursue mere repetitions of assumptions and insinuations of alleged manipulation of recordings that are ultimately not relevant to the proceedings", said senior public prosecutor Ricardo Schulz, spokesman for the public prosecutor's office, in response to an inquiry from the German Press Agency.

The background to this are statements made by the singer, who last Friday, as a participant in the RTL jungle camp, pointed out alleged inconsistencies and possible manipulation of a video recording. The musician made headlines in 2021 when he portrayed himself on Instagram as the victim of anti-Semitic remarks made by a Leipzig hotel employee. These accusations later turned out to be false. Ofarim retracted his account in a defamation case against him and apologized.

Later statements do not lead to a retrial

The public prosecutor's office also ruled out consequences for Ofarim himself. "With the full payment of the court-ordered fine, the criminal proceedings against Gil Ofarim were finally discontinued by the Leipzig Regional Court on August 21, 2024." This means that the charges against the defendant can no longer be pursued again in new proceedings. The decision cannot be appealed. Ofarim's retrospective statements can therefore not lead to the criminal proceedings being reopened.

This discontinuation of proceedings is not an acquittal, the authorities added. According to the express diction of the Leipzig Regional Court, the confession, the apology to the injured party and the fulfilment of the court's conditions eliminated the public interest in the prosecution and no verdict was necessary.

Investigating authority sees only repetitions of earlier statements

"The statements made by Gil Ofarim in recent days are ultimately only repetitions from the criminal trial of November 2023 for the public prosecutor's office. In this trial, the defense of the defendant at the time also pointed out alleged inconsistencies and possible manipulation of a video recording, as a few seconds were missing," said Schulz. At the same time, however, the defense also emphasized that the video was not decisive for the evidence.

In contrast, the district court had no doubts about the probative value of the video recordings or the statements of the witnesses heard up to that point, Schulz recalled a statement from the district court at the time.