Australian Appeals Court Allows Video of Sydney Hospital Workers Threatening Israelis to Be Used at Trial

The video call in which two former Sydney hospital workers made severe threats against Israelis will be used as evidence in their trial, which began today (Monday). The decision came after the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal overturned an earlier ruling by the Sydney District Court, which had found that the video would not be admissible as evidence.

According to a report by Australia’s ABC network, the appeals court ruled that the full, unedited video will not be excluded, despite the defense’s arguments. The court’s full reasoning was provided at this stage only to the parties, so they can determine which parts should be subject to publication bans or confidentiality. As a result, the reasoning itself cannot yet be made public.

At the center of the case are Ahmad “Rashad” Nadir and Sarah Abu Lebdeh, a male nurse and a female nurse, who were recorded last year during a video call with Israeli content creator Max Veifer. The clip, which Veifer published, began after the two confirmed that they worked at Bankstown Hospital in Sydney.

When Veifer told Nadir that he was from Israel, Nadir replied: “It makes me so angry that you’re Israeli.” He later added: “Eventually, you will be murdered and go to hell, inshallah.” After Veifer asked why he would be killed, Abu Lebdeh intervened and said: “This is the country of Palestine, not yours, you piece of s**t.”

As the conversation continued, the statements escalated. Nadir said: “You have no idea how many Israeli dogs have come to the hospital, and I send them to hell.” Abu Lebdeh replied: “When you die, I want you to remember my face so you understand—you will die the most disgusting death.” At a later point, she stated that she would not help Israelis: “I won’t treat them, I’ll kill them.”

Nadir joined in and said that he would send Israelis to hell, while waving his hand in a threatening manner. After the video was published, the two, who worked as nurses at the hospital, were suspended for two years.

One of the central issues discussed in the appeal concerned where, legally speaking, the recording was made. The prosecution argued that the recording was made in Israel, because Max Veifer was there during the call, and therefore did not violate New South Wales law. The defense, on the other hand, argued that at least part of the recording was made in Australia, since the microphone that captured the two workers’ voices was at Bankstown Hospital.

Peter Lang, the lawyer representing the two, argued that “the conversation may have been in Israel, but it also took place in New South Wales,” and therefore, he said, the legality of the recording should be examined under local law.

According to the ABC report, the prosecution emphasized that the video is key evidence in the case and that without it, jurors would struggle to understand the full context of what was said. It argued that only viewing the complete recording would allow them to assess the defendants’ tone of voice, gestures, and facial expressions. “Without the video, the prosecution’s case is weakened very significantly,” the prosecution representative said.