2026-01-03 Badges of Fraud: Fraud Notice #29 was given to Adv. Rachel Ben Ari, in re: Forgeries in the "Estate Inventory" of the late Rivka Zernik, that Ben-Ari submitted to the Administrator General (Public Guardian) on January 28, 2025
Executive SummaryAdv. Rachel Ben-Ari is a well-known attorney who has held senior appointments in the Bar Association and served two terms as a member of the Judicial Selection Committee. Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari is a true product of the system. Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari advertises herself as "90 years of legal excellence," as her grandfather was a well-known attorney in Haifa and a member of the first five Knessets. A recent review conducted by Joseph Zernik, PhD, LLB, shows that Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari allegedly forged legal documents that she submitted to the offices of the Administrator General, Haifa and North District. The essence of the forgeries is the creation of false representations that Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari was appointed as Estate Administrator for the late Rivka Zernik. The forgeries also include an affidavit, forgeries and fraud by a lawyer in an affidavit may result in relatively severe punishment. According to the heir, Joseph Zernik, Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari is engaging in fraud in the Haifa Family Court in collusion with Judge Hila Gurvitz , whose appointment Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari promoted. The obious questions are:
* Why did Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari need forgery, when Judge Hila Gurvitz was at her service ?
* How could forged documents be accepted for registration at the offices of the Administrator General?
* After receiving notification of the forgeries, will the Administrator General ensure that the forged documents are removed from the register?Notice was given to Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari regarding the forgeries in the documents she submitted to the Administrator General as Fraud Letter #29: Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari was asked to explain and/or refute the allegations of forgery, fraud, and impersonating another person, which include criminal offenses.Badges of Fraud is a legal and evidentiary doctrine intended for use in complex fraud cases. Even if there is no direct proof of fraud, the party against whom fraud is alleged is asked to explain and/or refute events that are perceived as "Badges of Fraud." If there is no explanation or refutation of such signs, the series of signs will be considered as a circumstantial proof of fraud, and the burden of proof and persuasion shifts to the party against whom fraud is alleged.Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari is a sign of the times - corruption of judges and the legal profession in Israel.
Notice is given to you that forgeries identified in the "Estate Inventory of the Late Rivka Zernik," which you filed with the Administrator General (Public Guardian) office on January 28, 2025, have been jointly recorded as Fraud Notice #29 among the Badges of Fraud that allegedly appear in your conduct.
You are invited to respond by January 7, 2026, explaining and/or refuting the facts and conclusions regarding Fraud Notice #29 among the Badges of Fraud.
Fraud Notice #29 is being copied to the heads of universities and other institutions where you serve as legal advisor or in any other position, according to your office's publications, as a preliminary attachment to a formal request to suspend you from any appointment and any position in such institutions.
The doctrine of Badges of Fraud originated in English law. The doctrine states that in complex fraud cases, the accumulation of signs of fraud that the suspect does not explain or plausibly refute can constitute circumstantial evidence of fraud and even shift the burden of proof and persuasion to the defendant. See, the ruling of Justice T. Strasberg-Cohen in Civil Appeal 8482/01 Bank Igud LeIsrael Ltd. v. Sandowski P.D. 55 ( 5) 776 (2003), " When a number of signs of fraud are discovered... it is possible to infer from them an intention to defraud, and the burden shifts to the defendant to explain the conduct."
As someone who has known you since childhood, it is difficult for me to understand how you developed into what you are today. I tried to explain the situation to myself as a phenomenon that had only recently begun. Indeed, you published that your office only recently developed activity in the family courts, whose corruption is notorious. However, I find it difficult to believe that a person can fundamentally change his character at close to 70. Also, the judges involved in the Haifa Family Court case were appointed to their judicial positions during your tenure as a member of the Judicial Selection Committee: Judge Hila Gurevitz, in 2012; Judge Revital Baum, in 2009 (as a magistrate) and in 2012 (as justice of the peace); and Judge Tal Paperny, in 2013. In other words, more than ten years ago, you promoted the appointments of questionable judges in the Haifa district, and they are now partners in your actions.
Therefore, the more likely interpretation is that over the years, you developed a dual professional personality: On the one hand, you inherited from your father the reputation and position of legal advisor to the Technion, and expanded it to advise other academic institutions. On the other hand, you developed skills similar to those of Efi Naveh and Judge Varda Alsheikh.
Truly,
Joseph Zernik PhD, LLB
.
Fraud Notice #29 - Forgery and fraud in the "Estate Inventory of the Late Rivka Zernik," which Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari filed with the Administrator General (Public Guardian) office on January 28, 2025
An investigation into the affair raises serious concerns that a network of senior institutional lawyers, both within and outside the public service, assisted Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari in her alleged criminality.
.
Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari and Yoav Salomon introduced themselves at the top of Page 1 of the Estate Inventory as administrators of the Estate of the late Rivka Shami Zernik,
"We, Rachel Ben-Ari, Esq ... Yoav Salomon, Esq, names of the Estate Administrators, who serve according to an Order in Rem (binding against all third parties) issued by the Haifa Family Court (Estate File 11650-06-24) on December 1, 2024 (attached as "Appendix 1")..." [bold and underline in the original - jz].
.
In the "Table of Contents" of the appendices to the Estate Inventory, on page 5, Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari and Adv. Yoav Salomon again wrote:
"Appendix 1 - Order in Rem (binding against all third parties) appointing Estate Administrators."
Image | Page 5 of the Estate Inventory statement submitted by Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari and Adv. Yoav Salomon to the offices of the Administrator General on 28.1.2025, and recorded on 30.1.2025: "Table of Contents," "Appendix 1 - Order in Rem (binding against all third parties) appointing Estate Administrators."
.
However, the document that appears in Appendix 1 to the Estate Inventory statement is not an "Order in Rem (binding against all third parties) appointing Estate Administrators," but rather a "Short-form Judgment - Appointment of Estate Administrators," dated 1.12.2024.
In other words, the two advocates substituted the Order in Rem, which constitutes the lawful appointment of an estate administrator, with a "Short-form Judgment" dated December 1, 2024, which is invalid in the absence of the "Order in Rem."
.
Image | "Short-form Judgment - Appointment of Estate Administrators" -- a garbled and invalid document generated by Judge Hila Gurevitz, Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari and Adv. Yoav Salomon, which was filed as Appendix 1 to the "Estate Inventory," and was identified and referred to as "Order in Rem for the Appointment of Estate Administrators." The "Short-form Judgment - Appointment of Estate Administrators" was also presented to the banks and the Land Registry and accepted by them as purported documentary evidence of the lawful appointment of the Estate Administrators, in violation of the law.
.
Furthermore, the manner in which attorneys Rachel Ben-Ari and Yoav Salomon falsely presented the "Short-form Judgment" as an "Order in Rem" suggests the intent of deceit. The two of them knew, or should have known, that they were not legally appointed, and acted to conceal the lack of an order appointing them as legal estate administrators.
The refusal to provide me, as an heir, with a copy of the Estate Inventory, in disregard of the law, which mandates providing the Estate Inventory to the heirs within 60 days after their appointment, and in disregard of my repeated requests, is apparently related to the same matter. The two advocates were probably concerned, and rightly so, that if they provided me with a copy of the Estate Inventory, I would immediately recognize the fraud.
The production of any document by Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari and Adv. Yoav Salomon to the office of the Administrator General cannot remedy the Clerk of the Court's failure to serve the Administrator General with the Order in Rem.
Service of records by the Clerk of the Court, as prescribed by law, is a distinct means of authentication known for centuries. Such service is intended to prevent acts of fraud of the type allegedly before us.
.
As soon as it was filed as a draft in Estate File 11650-06-24 in the Haifa Family Court, before it was purportedly signed by Judge Hila Gurvitz, I objected to the "Short-form Judgment - Appointment of Estate Administrators". I filed and re-filed my objection. I argued then, and I argue today, the "Short-form Judgment - Appointment of Estate Administrators" is an act of fraud:
The ruling in the Short-form Judgment is not based on a previous decision or judgment, and therefore is not valid as a Short-form Judgment.
The ruling begins, "... I decide as follows," indicating that it is a de novo decision and not a Short-form Judgment.
There is no "Protocol [minutes - jz] of the October 9, 2024 hearing" in which "the agreement among the heirs of the deceased was recorded", as stated in the opening of the Short-form Judgment.
In retrospect, following the event on October 9, 2024, which, according to Judge Hila Gurevitz, was a court hearing in a court of the State of Israel, Judge Hila Gurevitz tried to force me, Joseph Zernik, to accept audio tapes as court records, i.e., the hearing Protocol, pursuant to the "Court's Pilot Experiment". This attempt to force acceptance of invalid documents as court records should be seen as part of the general characteristic of this court file - routine corruption of the documents, rendering them invalid.
As in other events of this nature, I asked Judge Hila Gurevitz for a written source for the court procedures that she claimed existed, i.e., "the court's pilot experiment". As in other events of this nature, Judge Gurevitz refused to provide a written source for the court procedures that she faked.
Following various inquiries that took about two months, I obtained a legal position paper from the Administration of the Courts – an audio tape could not be used as a Protocol. If any of the parties requested a lawful Protocol, the judge had to prepare one pursuant to mandatory Procedure 03-14 of the Administration of Courts. However, Judge Hila Gurevitz stubbornly refused to prepare such a Protocol.
Her "ruling" does not reflect an "agreement among the heirs of the deceased ." The normative way to submit requests by consent is for the consenting parties to sign. This is not how Judge Hila Gurvitz acted. She ordered the opposing party's lawyers to prepare her "ruling" and did not require my signature as evidence of my consent. As is their custom, the lawyers also did not submit an affidavit with the proposal for her "ruling." At the same time, I repeatedly clarified, in writing, my opposition to her "ruling." First and foremost - due to the lack of an obligation to uphold the Estate Distribution Agreement among the heirs according to her "ruling," or any law of the State of Israel for that matter. I described the submission of the "ruling" by attorneys Rachel Ben-Ari and Yoav Salomon to Judge Hila Gurevitz for approval as an act of fraud.
The "ruling" also does not mention the duties of the Estate Administrators under the Inheritance Law, 1965, listed in the Order in Rem appointing an Estate Administrator, namely: "to provide the heirs, on the dates specified for this purpose, the Estate's inventory and financial reports according to the Inheritance Law, 1965, and the regulations amended thereunder " ... Indeed, the purported Estate Administrators, Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari and Adv. Yoav Solomon, have stubbornly refuse to provide me, one of the heirs, the mandated reports, despite my repeated requests.
The "ruling" does not mention the obligations of the estate administrators, Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari and Attorney Yoav Solomon, under the "Estate Distribution Agreement among the Heirs pursuant to Section 110 of the Inheritance Law, 1965," dated August 28, 2023, which was approved by the court on December 13, 2023. Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari and Attorney Yoav Solomon drafted the Agreement, and they were appointed therein, at their request, as appointees and trustees for a fee to execute the Agreement. As they themselves explained in their submission to the court on November 4, 2024, the "ruling" was intended to purportedly release them from their obligations under the "Estate Distribution Agreement.
At the same time, in section 4.3 of the "ruling" a payment of NIS 30,000 + VAT was determined for each of the two advocates, which was a payment according to the Distribution Agreement for their work in implementing that Agreement, and not a payment according to the accepted method for determining and paying the fees of Estate Administrators ... In short, they are violating the Distribution Agreement, except for collecting their fees for work that they did not do.
The provisions of her "ruling" in Section 3 are contrary to the laws of the State of Israel. Judge Hila Gurvitz creates a false representation that her "ruling" is valid vis-à-vis third parties, such as the banks, for the legal appointment of Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari and Attorney Yoav Salomon as Estate Administrators. The legal basis for the appointment of Estate Administrators is the "Order in Rem" for the appointment of Estate Administrators ."
The provisions of the " judgment " in Section 2 are contrary to the laws of the State of Israel , and are also a serious violation of the human rights of the heir , Yosef Tzurnik , according to Section 16 , Part 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( done in New York on December 16, 1966, signed by the State of Israel on December 19, 1966, entered into force in the State of Israel on January 3, 1992 ), which states : " Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law ." Section 2 of her "ruling" is based on the purported Judge Hila Gurevitz' decisions dated June 25, 2024 and October 9, 2024, at the request of Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari and Attorney Yoav Salomon - to revoke any recognition of me as an autonomous legal personality, insofar as I am not represented by an advocate... This, while Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari advertises that she headed the Haifa branch of the Association for Civil Rights, and that she was one of the founders and members of the Judge Haim Cohen Center for the Defense of Human Rights ... and while Attorney Yoav Salomon includes a quote from President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address in the signature of each of his emails ... The emancipation of black slaves and their recognition as legal persons was a fundamental issue in the Civil War and the Reconstruction period (1865–1877) ...
The Post-it Decision that appears in the lower left corner of the "ruling" in lieu of a signature is not a standard signature. The invisible electronic signature on the decision is not a signature on the document itself. Therefore, the signature on the note, to the extent it exists, verifies only the note's content. The content of the note is a testimony about a signature. However, this type of testimony, which is notarial testimony regarding a judge's signature, is not within the jurisdiction of the judges. It is the jurisdiction of the Chief Secretary. In any case, no person is authorized to testify to a notarial testimony regarding his own signature, including a notary.
Her "ruling" should be deemed an act of forgery, the product of collaboration among Adv. Rachel Ben-Ari, Yoav Salomon, and Judge Hila Gurevitz.
The affair presents a multi-layered fraud over the past two years. The "Short-form Judgment" represents the juncture, where the procedural fraud - conducting proceedings in Case No. 11650-06-24 as a fictitious court file, which has nothing to do with the laws of the State of Israel, is realized as the substantial fraud - stealing heir Joseph Zernik's share of the Estate's funds. Indeed, this was the stated goal starting in early May 2024.
Image | The authentic affidavit in Form 11 (Regulation 39) - Estate Inventory.
Image | Certification of the corrupt affidavit filed in the office of the Administrator General by Attorney Rachel Ben-Ari and Attorney Yoav Solomon with the Estate Inventory.
About 10 years ago , the opinion of Prof. Dafna Hecker (Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University) was published by Chen Maanit, " Family Courts : ' There is a jungle in the courts . Do everything to avoid ending up there '" Globes (2016):
" At least in my field [ family law - H. M. ], and I hear in other fields as well , we are in an era of declining values and rising chaos . If judges do not obey the law and do not respect precedents of higher courts - why does it continue to be called ' trial '?... So what is this thing that calls itself a trial , but is conducted arbitrarily according to the absolute discretion of those sitting on the throne ? ... We are prisoners of a system that has forgotten that it is a judicial system . ... The damage is terrible and frightening . They did everything to avoid going to court - there is no trial there ! "
Only after the death of my late mother , did I discover her joint and mutual will, which had been hidden from me until that day ( and was not even submitted to the registrar of inheritance matters after the death of my late father ) . This will was the reason for the inappropriate activity in the guardianship of my late mother . Therefore , on January 11, 2022, I filed notices of review ( not requests for review ) of a first-degree relative and heir of the deceased , in three related guardianship cases :
1. A.P. 1829-06-10 - Request for the appointment of a guardian ,
No comments:
Post a Comment