On 27 September, Shmuel Zakai testified in favor of Azaria claiming that he didn't shoot to kill and also stated that the way he is documented in the videos shooting Sharif, it was clear to him that Azaria was in danger. He gave his opinion that Azaria was afraid of a bomb while criticizing Azaria's company commander Tom Na'aman stating that the incident would have been avoided had he properly clarified the rules of engagement. He explained that in some operational situations, orders are given that alter the rules of engagement, such as when opening fire would put IDF soldiers at risk, stating Na'aman did not give that order and left the soldier with the previous and unclear rules of engagement. He also criticized his former brigade commander Yariv Ben-Ezra for his orders. Mark Weiser, a psychiatrist who met with Azaria after the incident to assess his mental standing, also testified. He stated that the shooter did not suffer from PTSD, contradicting his attorney's claims. In response to Azaria's accusations that he was cooperating with the prosecution to convict him at any cost and laughed at him, Weiser stated that he told Azaria he wasn't conspiring against him nor laughed at him, but might have smiled at him when he said he wanted to harm him as he considered it humoristic. On 26 October, Yoni Bleichbard, the head of settlement security in Hebron, testified in favor of Azaria claiming that he hadn't reported it as irregular shooting and Azaria was right to shoot Sharif. When questioned about Ben-Ezra's testimony that he had reported the incident as irregular, he stated that he didn't know what the commander was thinking and what he understood. He also claimed his testimony was full of contradictions and claimed that the scene was handled improperly, leading to the controversial incident. He also claimed that he did not remember exactly what he saw Azaria do or what he told the IDF about it. Upon being questioned by the prosecution, he stated that Azaria's lawyer Eyal Beserglick had sought his help to "destroy the brigade commander" and he had repeatedly rejected his requests. Beserglick claimed what he said to him was terminology regarding undermining the reliability of the brigade commander. When questioned about Beserglick's message to have him court ordered as well his replies to cause a commotion and not to speak anything if he was forced to be there, he claimed that he did all he could not to come as he was against the attempt to turn him into a "state liar".