▁inc idents ▁in ▁Ira q ▁and ▁the ▁pro sec ution ▁was ▁not ▁able ▁to ▁produce ▁a ▁single ▁e y ew it ness . ▁Sh alom ▁Sal ah ▁told ▁the ▁court ▁that ▁he ▁had ▁conf essed ▁after ▁being ▁sever ely ▁tort ured . ▁There ▁were ▁no ▁other ▁evidence ▁which ▁directly ▁related ▁the ▁accused ▁to ▁the ▁bomb ing , ▁but ▁only ▁circumst ant ial ▁evidence ▁concerning ▁the ▁discovery ▁of ▁explos ive ▁devices ▁and ▁weapons . ▁ ▁The ▁ 8 ▁April ▁ 1 9 5 0 ▁bomb ▁incident , ▁in ▁which ▁ 4 ▁Jews ▁were ▁injured , ▁was ▁omitted ▁from ▁the ▁charge ▁sheet ▁against ▁the ▁members ▁of ▁the ▁under ground , ▁although ▁it ▁appeared ▁in ▁the ▁government ▁statement . ▁The ▁pro sec utor ▁" c laimed ▁that ▁the ▁perpet rat ors ▁had ▁planned ▁to ▁cause ▁injury ▁but ▁not ▁loss ▁of ▁life . ▁The ▁gr en ade , ▁however , ▁had ▁claimed ▁five ▁lives ▁at ▁the ▁syn agog ue ▁( or ▁four , ▁according ▁to ▁the ▁charges ) ▁and ▁injured ▁more ▁than ▁ 2 0 ▁people . ▁This ▁did ▁not ▁prevent ▁the ▁pro sec utor , ▁in ▁his ▁con cluding ▁address , ▁from ▁including ▁this ▁incident ▁in ▁the ▁list ▁of ▁charges ▁against ▁the ▁under ground , ▁although ▁this ▁contrad icted ▁the ▁evidence ▁of ▁the ▁two ▁witness es ." ▁Nevertheless , ▁they ▁were ▁not ▁accused ▁for ▁the ▁Syn agog ue ▁bomb ing . ▁ ▁G at ▁suggests ▁the ▁perpet rat ors ▁could ▁have ▁been ▁members ▁of ▁the ▁anti - J ew ish ▁Ist i ql al ▁Party .