Sarah Abu Lebdeh, 27, and Ahmad Rashad Nadir, 28, face criminal charges in Australia for statements made in an online video in February 2025 in which they allegedly threatened Israelis, prompting nationwide bans from treating patients. Photo: Screenshot

An Australian appeals court has overturned a previous ruling and allowed a widely circulated video showing two nurses allegedly threatening to kill Israeli patients to be admitted as evidence, paving the way for a closely watched trial later this month.

On Monday, the New South Wales Court of Appeal ruled that videos and other recordings of a conversation between former Sydney nurses Ahmad Rashad Nadir, 28, and Sarah Abu Lebdeh, 27, and Israeli influencer Max Veifer — in which the pair allegedly posed as doctors and made inflammatory statements — would not be excluded and will be used as evidence in their trial.

A central point of the appeal was determining where the recording legally took place. Prosecutors argued it was made in Israel because Veifer was located there when he recorded the conversation, meaning New South Wales laws restricting such recordings did not apply. 

However, the defense argued it was partly recorded in Australia because the microphone capturing the nurses’ voices was inside the Bankstown hospital.

The prosecution also argued that the footage was essential for jurors to fully understand the exchange, saying the video would allow them to evaluate not only the words spoken but also the defendants’ tone, gestures, and facial expressions.

With the appeal decision, the court overturned an earlier ruling by the District Court in Sydney that had prevented the recordings from being used as evidence, allowing the trial to proceed later this month.

Earlier this year, defense lawyers for the two nurses challenged the admissibility of the recordings, arguing they were obtained without their clients’ consent and in breach of NSW laws prohibiting the recording of private conversations without permission.

However, prosecutor Justin Hannebery argued that the online conversation did not carry the same expectation of privacy as a private exchange, noting that the nurses and Veifer were strangers who met through a random and anonymous online connection. 

He also maintained that the significance of the footage to the prosecution’s case outweighed concerns about the way it had been obtained.

The incident began last year after Veifer recorded his Chatroulette conversation with Lebdeh and Nadir, a platform that randomly pairs users from around the world for online chats.

The widely circulated footage, which sparked international outrage and condemnation, showed Abu Lebdeh declaring she would refuse to treat Israeli patients and instead kill them, while Nadir made a throat-slitting gesture and claimed he had already killed many.

“It’s Palestine’s country, not your country, you piece of s—t,” Lebdeh told Veifer.

“One day your time will come, and you will die the most disgusting death,” she added.

During the late-night conversation, Veifer asked the pair, who were then working at Sydney’s Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital, how they would respond if an Israeli patient arrived for treatment, prompting Lebdeh to reply: “I won’t treat them. I’ll kill them.”

“You have no idea how many s—t dog Israelis came to this hospital. I sent them to Jahannam [the Islamic word for hell],” Nadir said while making a throat-slitting gesture. 

Shortly after the video went viral, Australian authorities suspended both nurses nationwide for two years, preventing them from continuing to treat patients while the case proceeded.

Abu Lebdeh was charged with federal offenses, including threatening violence against a group and using a carriage service to threaten, menace, and harass. If convicted, she faces up to 22 years in prison.

Nadir was also charged with federal offenses, including using a carriage service to menace, harass, or cause offense, as well as possession of a prohibited drug.

In February, both nurses pleaded not guilty to the charges and have maintained their innocence as the case moves toward trial, which is expected to draw significant public and media attention.