"Q. Now, at any time after you lost the arbitration in New York. Did you ask Moti Morel or any other person to make a press release going back on what you said to bank Leumi or to the public concerning Merkai tikshoret?
A. We issued a press release confirming that we had lost the arbitration and,
Q. But no letter to Galya Maor or to Bank Leumi or to Moti Morel to do that?
A. Moti Morel was I think no longer engaged. We concluded that because the news was across the wire and picked up by all agencies that that would have been sufficient in a certain sense."
כלומר, כאשר הנתבעים הפסידו די בידיעה לסוכנות ידיעות כללית בכדי להביא את הדבר לידיעת כולם, לרבות בנק לאומי. לעומת זאת, כאשר עדיין ניתן ללחוץ על מר עזור, פונים במכתב ישיר למנכ"לית בנק לאומי, ודואגים להפיץ את תוכנו באופן מיידי בתקשורת הישראלית.
גם אספר נחקר בעניין זה, כדלקמן (עמ' 113 ש' 10-20):
"Q. Did you write another letter to bank Leumi or did you, did you say anything to Moti Morel,
A. No.
Q. To, to try and soften it and to make another publication?
A. No, no, but I didn’t see it until a year or two later, as far as I was concerned it was all over and it was, the letter to bank Leumi would have lapsed essentially been irrelevant once the decision came out bank Leumi, we issued a press release, bank Leumi would have seen the decision was what it was."
ובהמשך (עמ' 113 ש' 22 עד עמ' 114 ש' 23):
Q. Why didn’t you bother at least to send another letter to bank Leumi? Because bank Leumi could have read about the arbitration in the newspaper... to make sure they know it's irrelevant anymore?
A. I would think they, think they would know automatically it was irrelevant we issued a press release, the same way we issued a press release when we wrote the letter…
Q. you specifically wrote bank Leumi and you didn’t think it was enough to use the press, stage one. Stage two when its over why now the press is enough and you don’t send another letter to Galya Maor saying regarding our letter dated so and so the arbitration was,
--- סוף עמוד 28 ---