Ari Zivotofsky
Preamble: The following article was written prior to the two major revelations of late October/early November 2025 regarding this case – the seeming direct involvement of the military attorney general herself in leaking evidence to the press[1] and the revelation that the supposed victim and sole witness had been released to Gaza.[2] The article is being published as originally written, without reference to either of those potentially game-changing developments.
The start of the Sde Teiman trial in July 2025[3] brought back into public awareness that painful and emotionally charged affair. With the benefit of time and emotional distance, there is an opportunity to thoughtfully evaluate how events were responded to as they unfolded. It is worth asking whether our immediate reactions at the time truly reflected the moral and ethical standards rooted in Jewish tradition. In retrospect, might a more measured or compassionate response have better aligned with the Jewish principles that guide us? With many more facts in hand, it is appropriate to evaluate how the principals involved behaved.
Background: It has now been well over a year since that dark Monday – July 29, 2024 / 23 Tammuz 5784 – when masked military police stormed the Sde Teiman IDF base and aggressively arrested nine Israeli reservist soldiers on suspicion of severe abuse, including sodomy with a blunt object, of an alleged Nukhba terrorist prisoner being held at the military base notorious for holding the most despicable of the Hamas terrorists. The immediate reaction of nationalistic politicians and their supporters was condemnation of the arrest methods and detention conditions, coupled with concern about the message that it projected about Israel, especially during a time of war. They erected a solid wall of support for the Sde Teiman soldiers even prior to knowing all the details. This show of support included some of the group illegally breaking into IDF bases.[4] The reaction of politicians on the left[5] was stern condemnation of the right, in particular of the activists’ forcible entry into the bases, support for the military advocate general’s office (MAG), and an insinuation of guilt of the arrested servicemen in the court of public opinion, also before the evidence was examined. Less than a year prior to this event, on Simhat Torah 5784 / October 7, 2023, Hamas terrorists and their supporters carried out a vicious attack in southern Israel, in which over 1,200 people were brutally massacred, over 200 were abducted, and many more were injured, raped, or mutilated. This initiated Israel’s longest war. Many of the worst of the terrorists were subsequently apprehended and imprisoned in the Sde Teiman detention center where they were under the watchful eyes of “Force 100” reservists. Currently part of the Duvdevan counterterrorism unit, Force 100 was reactivated at the start of the war and includes elite reservists who have undergone rigorous training, both in combat and in dealing with the special circumstances of guarding some of the evilest detainees in the world.[6] It was on the basis of the testimony and some supposed physical evidence provided by one of these detainees, a suspected arch-terrorist, rapist, and murderer, that said raid and arrests of reservists occurred.
With the passage of time, it is possible to consider if the reactions in real-time were appropriate, and, if not, what might have been more appropriate responses. Our Jewish tradition offers a wealth of moral guidance and ethical teachings that can illuminate how we might have approached this unfortunate incident with greater wisdom and compassion. And with hindsight it is also possible to evaluate the behavior of the principals involved.
La-dun le-kaf zekhut: Judaism places great value on the principle of la-dun le-kaf zekhut – judging others favorably, or what is known in English as “giving the benefit of the doubt” or treating people as “innocent until proven guilty.” Without any additional information, what should our reaction be to the arrests and the manner in which they were carried out? How do we respond to suspected abuse of terrorists? The ethical tractate Pirkei Avot (1:6) exhorts us to give the benefit of the doubt. Similarly, the Talmud (Shavuot 30a) derives from the verse (Leviticus 19:15) “in righteousness shall you judge your colleague” that one should judge his fellow in a favorable light and try to find justification for his actions. Elsewhere, the Talmud (Shabbat 127b) suggests that he who judges others favorably will merit that others will judge him favorably. Rambam (Hilkhot Dei’ot 5:7) includes judging others favorably as a trait found in Torah scholars. This Jewish value suggests that, after hearing about the accusations against these individuals– individuals who until then had a presumption of innocence, had a clean record, and served our country with devotion–one should look for a way to view them in an innocent light. (This principle which I am invoking in a call to view the Force 100 soldiers in a “favorable light” at the time of their arrest should not be taken to the extreme. The Nukhba detainees, while entitled to a fair trial, have a much weaker presumption of innocence, having been apprehended on October 7 or immediately thereafter, after crossing illegally into Israel proper, many having videotaped their own heinous crimes.)
Lifnim mi-shurat ha-din – Going beyond the letter of the law: This fundamental Jewish value ranks alongside other basic moral imperatives. The Talmud (Bava Metzia 30b) interprets Exodus 18:20’s reference to “the path [Israel] shall walk and the action that they must perform” to include acts of kindness, visiting the ill, burial, strict justice, and acting beyond the letter of the law.
How should we relate to soldiers who may have (under great stress) abused terrorists, but who also may not have abused them? Some advocated for investigation, prosecution, and, if found guilty, punishment to the full extent of the law for the Force 100 detainees.[7] Indeed, due process and a fair trial are obviously warranted. But what should we anticipate if there is a conviction? Regarding the terrorists themselves, some argued that Jewish values require compassion even towards nationalistically motivated brutal murderers.[8] Does this required compassion apply to the terrorist but not to a soldier convicted of abusing that terrorist? Do Jewish morals really tell us that, after a trial of a man with no criminal record who was serving our country by guarding archenemies under extremely stressful conditions, we should punish to the full extent of the law?[9]
Judaism is a religion of compassion. The common perception is that the Second Temple was destroyed because of the story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza (Gittin 55b-56a) and sin’at hinam (baseless hatred) (Yoma 9b), but that is not the only ethical message derived from those dark days in 70 CE. The Talmud (Bava Metzia 30b) also states: R. Yohanan said: “Jerusalem was destroyed only because the judges ruled in accordance with the strict letter of the law, as opposed to ruling beyond the letter of the law [lifnim mi-shurat ha-din].” In other words, the hurban is also attributed to exactly such an attitude of ‘punish to the full extent of the law!’[10]This Jewish value suggests that the arrest, detainment, and, if convicted, sentence, of such individuals should be tempered by considerations of lifnim mi-shurat ha-din. This is recognized in other jurisdictions. A 2021 report by the U.S. Sentencing Commissions[11] suggests that PTSD and similar claims by veterans should be a mitigating factor in sentencing. Whether or not the Force 100 soldiers were given a diagnosis of PTSD, there is no question that they were under extreme stress. Should we not give our soldiers the same consideration the U.S. gives its veterans? Regarding convicted Arab nationalistic felons, our system at times does not punish to the full extent of the law. On Aug. 30, 2018 the High Court significantly reduced[12] the sentence (eliminating all jail time) for one of three criminals convicted of smuggling 4×4 vehicles (of the type used October 7) into Hamas-controlled Gaza, because he had obtained a driver’s license, was registered in college, and in general seemed to be rehabilitating.
“Imitatio Dei” – emulating God’s attributes of mercy: We are enjoined to emulate attributes of God, as the Talmud states (Shabbat 133b): Be similar, to Him: “Just as He is compassionate and merciful, so too should you be compassionate and merciful.” These Jewish values of compassion and mercy might help guide our behavior – including for these IDF soldiers. Even the arrest and detention should have been done with compassion and mercy.
The Sde Teiman IDF detainees, on that first day, were without a criminal record, were family men, people who served their county with distinction. The initial reaction to the accusations against them, which if true might have been a gross error in judgment or a snapping under pressure, should have been the application of God’s attributes – compassion, slowness to anger, etc. The behavior of the authorities was the exact opposite. The detainees were treated like the most hardened of criminals. That is not how a criminal justice system based on the spirit of Judaism should operate, and the reaction of the public should have been a resounding rejection of the methods, coupled with a desire for a full and fair investigation.
The imperative to show compassion does have limits, as explained in the Yalkut Shim’oni (121:3 on Nakh) and elsewhere, that “he who is compassionate to the cruel will ultimately become cruel to the compassionate.” However, that admonition about not being compassionate to the cruel applies to how the terrorists are treated, not to these detainees. While the terrorists are entitled to a trial, they were arrested on October 7 and the immediate aftermath in Israeli territory, a place where they had no business being, amongst a crowd that was carrying out unspeakable atrocities, and many were proud of what they had done.
Subsequent events: Within a month of the arrests, five of the detainees were released to house arrest and then released unconditionally. For the other five it took longer, but within a few months, all the detainees were without restrictions and back at their civilian jobs, as the judicial process continued for those five.[13]
What is of utmost significance is how the judicial system functioned. The investigation was conducted by the Military Criminal Investigation Division, and the case was placed under a gag order. And yet, despite the gag order, the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation got its hands on investigative material and showed the faces of several of the soldiers in a Channel 13 report.[14]
Additionally, video clips and investigative material which were only available to the prosecution and the IDF investigative team were leaked to Guy Peleg, a journalist with Channel 12. He in turn broadcasted a damning report, including a video (later shown to be of questionable veracity), claiming that the evidence supported the accusation of sodomy. This dramatic, explosive report was lapped up by global media outlets.[15] It did unspeakable, irreparable damage to the reputation of the IDF, its soldiers, the detainees, and their families. The fact that highly sensitive material from disparate arms of the investigation, including videos, polygraph results, medical data, and personal data, all reached one reporter seems to point to a “leak” from a pivotal person within the prosecution, possibly intentional. An unconscionable abuse by the criminal justice system! An intentional leak like this would be a flagrant violation of the integrity of the criminal proceedings. And yet, on September 17, 2025 the Ministry of Justice initially stated[16] that there would not be an investigation into this leak because, in its assessment, the video did not cause any harm to national security and did not expose classified information. And what about the fact that such a leak would be a breach of all standards for a prosecution? That was not of relevance to the Ministry of Justice.
Later reports indicated that the JAG might have actually had medical information from early July (i.e., prior to the arrests) that definitively refuted the sodomy charge, and this was reportedly confirmed by a doctor three weeks after the arrests. The sodomy charges were ultimately removed from the indictment.[17] Consultation with medical authorities and analysis of the medical records should have been done prior to any arrests.
Is it possible that in the course of duty, these reserve soldiers overstepped their legal bounds? It is possible – but could it have been dealt with by an internal investigation and disciplinary action rather than sullying the reputation of these soldiers, the army, and the entire country? Indeed, that would have been far wiser. And it seems that someone may have actually gotten the message – in early July 2025 when there was suspicion that three soldiers may have abused terrorists whom they were guarding at a base in the Upper Galilee, the soldiers were summoned for questioning,[18] and their base was not stormed by masked military police.
Sodom’s criminal justice system: The Jewish claim to the Land of Israel is biblical, historical, and eternal. This claim is contingent upon the Jewish nation establishing a just society in the Land (see, e.g. Jeremiah 7:3-7; Amos 2:6–8; Ezekiel 22:6–15). And God may look askance at a people who do not maintain a fair justice system. Sodom lost its right to exist not because of the eponymous heinous crime that these soldiers were accused of, but because of Sodom’s corrupt legal system (Sanhedrin 109a-b), as Professor Nechama Leibowitz, commenting on Pirkei De-Rabbi Eliezer 25, wrote: “But the height of their wickedness lay not in the activities of individual transgressors but in the fact that such iniquitous behavior was clothed with a cloak of legality.” A corrupt, malfunctioning legal system may be so egregious in God’s eyes as to threaten our right to the Land.
On this retrospective introspection of the Sde Teiman incident, it seems that a real lesson to be learned is a need to do soul-searching about the criminal justice system. It is hard to overstate the value that the Torah places on a fair and just judiciary. Based on the behavior of the principals in the Sde Teiman affair, the Israeli system does not seem to be meeting that standard, and the people of Israel have sensed that. A Reichman University study[19] from March 2025 reported that only 44% of the public has trust in the Supreme Court and a measly 32% has trust in the State Attorney’s Office. This lack of trust predates the societal divide exacerbated in the period of the attempted judicial reforms. At the end of 2021 a study[20] published by faculty at Haifa University found that 52% of the public expressed “low” to “very low” confidence in the Supreme Court, and only 25% expressed “high” or “very high” confidence. In other words, three out of four Israeli citizens do not have high confidence in the highest court in the land.
Looking back, how should the public have reacted to the Sde Teiman incident? Storming a military base is likely not the proper way to express frustration with the legal system, nor the wisest tactic. But the question stands: what Jewish values should have been guiding at the time. And the answer is: not absolute justice but mercy, not condemnation of soldiers even before the details were clarified but acting lifnim mi-shurat ha-din towards our soldiers. Not assumptions of guilt but la-dun le-kaf zekhut. Not vitriol but compassion and empathy. And certainly, the MAG, the Israeli media, and pundits should not be acting as “informers” (malshinim) whom we address in our daily prayers, thereby sullying the IDF’s reputation in front of a world eager to criticize us, especially in the middle of a vicious war. In other words, the public should have been outraged at the sorrowful behavior of the judicial system.
Sodom had a legal system. But it perverted rather than promoted justice. It was used (or abused) by those in authority to distort right from wrong. In the Sde Teiman episode, the Israeli legal system operated in a manner that ignored important Jewish values. It now appears that those who were critical of the MAG and suspected that the accusations and the manner of the arrests were unwarranted were correct. It seems that there was little basis to the accusation of sodomy beyond the testimony of a suspected rapist and murderer. Yet the lives and reputations of reservists who left their lives, wives, and children for months on end to join the people’s army and defend us all have been severely damaged. The reputation of our army has been blackened internationally. Now, a year later, five of the ten are totally exonerated and the other five have been indicted for assault, with no mention of sodomy or any other such heinous act. Their trial commenced in early July 2025 and is still ongoing. And in another failing of the justice system, the terrorists who are still being held have not even had indictments filed, a real denial of the fundamental right, in civil and Jewish law, of a speedy trial.
The Sde Teiman event unfortunately brought out some of the serious flaws within Israeli society. There were displays of self-righteousness by those trying to show that another Jew is not treating our avowed enemy properly, overreaction by all parties, and damage to the country’s reputation by those so willing to impugn others that they are willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is tragic that Israelis cannot live without fear of an overly zealous prosecutor and court system hauling them into an abyss of harrowing detention and endless legal proceedings until one is found not-guilty but has been destroyed in the process. As Isaiah (1:27) said: “Zion will be redeemed by justice, and those who return to her by acts of charity (tzedakah).” Rambam (Matnot Aniyim 10:1) understands that the crucial factor in bringing redemption is not justice but tzedakah – charity. And while Rambam refers to literal charity, charity also refers to acting beyond the letter of the law and being generous of spirit to all Jews. Rambam continues in the next halakhah by highlighting that each Jew must show mercy to his fellow Jew because if not, “who will show mercy to them? To whom do the poor of Israel lift up their eyes? To the gentiles who hate them and pursue them?” It is incumbent upon the authorities and the criminal judicial system of a Jewish state to show mercy to even Jews accused of serious crimes.
With prayers for a speedy and complete victory over all our external enemies and a fulfillment of Leviticus 26:6: “And I will give peace in the Land, and ye shall lie down, and none shall make you afraid; and I will cause evil beasts to cease out of the land, neither shall the sword go through your land.” Peace in the Land, Ramban says, can be interpreted as civil discourse between Jews as well as lack of an external enemy. May we be privileged to see both fulfilled.
[1] See “Full text of top IDF lawyer’s resignation letter over detainee abuse video leak,” The Times of Israel (October 31, 2025).
[2] Jeremy Sharon, “Palestinian detainee at heart of Sde Teiman abuse scandal was released to Gaza in ceasefire deal,” The Times of Israel (November 3, 2025).
[3] “Military court begins trial of soldiers over Sde Teiman incident,” Israel National News (July 7, 2025).
[4] Emanuel Fabian, “Military Police raid IDF detention facility, 9 held, over ‘serious abuse of a detainee’,” The Times of Israel (July 29, 2024).
[5] See Sam Sokol, “Lapid slams break-in to Sde Teiman base as ‘despicable and dangerous criminality’,” The Times of Israel (July 29, 2024).
[6] See “In Depth: Who are Force 100?,” Israel National News (July 29, 2024).
[7] See, e.g., Eran Shamir-Borer, “Israel must investigate claims of detainee abuse,” The Times of Israel (July 31, 2024).
[8] See, e.g., R. Benny Lau’s July 30, 2024 Facebook post.
[9] While perhaps intuitive, recently published evidence confirms that high stress can lead law-enforcement officers to be more violent. See Romnick T. Dela Cruz, “Levels of Stress And Aggression Among Police Officers” AIDE Interdisciplinary Research Journal 18 (2024): 9, 57-72.
[10] Regarding this interpretation of lifnim mi-shurat ha-din, see Ben Yehoyada ad loc, s.v. “ela eima she-he’emidu dineihem al din Torah, ve-lo avedu lifnim mi-shurat ha-din.” On the relationship of this value to the destruction of the Second Temple, see Rabbi Dr. Ari Z. Zivitofsky, “What’s the Truth about…the Cause of the Destruction of the Beit Hamikdash?,” Jewish Action (Summer 2004).
[11] United States Sentencing Commission, Federal Offenders Who Served in the Armed Forces (October 2021).
[12] Court decision accessible at- https://supremedecisions.court.gov.il/Home/Download?path=HebrewVerdicts/18/580/069/k07&fileName=18069580.K07&type=2
[13] See Honenu, “Sde Teiman soldiers released from restrictive conditions” (November 21, 2024).
[14] See Emanuel Fabian, “IDF slams broadcaster for showing faces of suspects detained in Sde Teiman abuse case,” The Times of Israel (August 12, 2024).
[15] See, for example, Faisal Ali, “Israeli media airs footage showing alleged sexual abuse of Palestinian detainee – video,” The Guardian (August 8, 2024).
[16] “Prosecution will not investigate video leak in Sde Teiman affair,” Israel National News (September 17, 2025).
[17] See Guy Samuel, “Sde Teiman: What the Evidence Actually Shows,” The Times of Israel (December 7, 2025).
[18] “Three IDF reservists said summoned for questioning over abuse of Hamas detainees,” The Times of Israel (July 8, 2025).
[19] Institute for Liberty & Responsibility, Public Trust Report (Reichman University, March 2025).
[20] See Yuval Elbashan, “Justice- The Public’s Loss of Trust,” Globes (December 30, 2021).
Site Operations and Technology by The Berman Consulting Group.