Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto says he went out of his way to make sure that the most recent head of the Lahav 433 Major Crimes Unit, Maj. Gen. Menashe Arviv, was a regular at a Manhattan hotel that was owned by a follower of his, Ben Zion Suky. Pinto reportedly gave Arviv's son, Tsachi, $2,000 a month and helped him get a U.S. work visa. Even worse, his actions may have allowed Arviv to buy an apartment at a discount rate, hundreds of thousands of shekels below the quoted figure. If Pinto went into great lengths to do all this, just when exactly did he have time for Torah study? Did he actually observe the Jewish precept of "you shall meditate on it day and night" (Joshua 1:8)? Arviv was not the only one Pinto pampered. The biblical passage "Ephraim my dear son, the child in whom I delight" (Jeremiah 31:19) would not apply on Arviv? There were many like Arviv who crowded into Pinto's court in Ashdod and Manhattan, and Pinto helped them all with great compassion. This operation was very time-consuming; it was a disgrace to the Torah. If Pinto's claims turn out to be true, than he will have corrupted Israel's senior law-enforcement officials: Arviv and Brig. Gen. Ephraim Bracha -- whom Pinto allegedly tried to bribe -- and many others whom he will try to implicate as his trial moves forward. The question must be asked: Should such a person serve as a halachic authority in Israel? In fact, there is no point in asking this. If Arviv's attorney, Yehoshua Reznik, is right and his client is innocent -- that he did not receive a discount on the apartment, that he did not get free hotel accommodation and that his son was not bankrolled by Pinto on a monthly basis -- then Pinto is just trying to tarnish his credentials. Pinto must be well aware of what the scriptures say on those who publicly humiliate others. The court will render its opinion on Pinto after the criminal proceedings are over and after the witnesses are examined and cross-examined. But just who exactly is Pinto? The public has already made up its mind. That is why Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein refused to accept a deal that would have saved the rabbi's skin, with Arviv taking the fall. Weinstein turned down this ugly proposition and said he would prosecute Pinto. That said, the Israel Police should launch a criminal probe over Arviv's conduct. Hopefully, Pinto and his people would agree to testify against him. But if that is not possible, the Police Internal Investigation Department should marshal every resource to find out just what happened and make a decision on whether to press charges against the man who headed the Israel Police Major Crimes Unit. Weinstein must not repeat his misguided conduct in the Harpaz Affair. He should have went ahead with the indictment against Lt. Col. (res.) Boaz Harpaz for allegedly trying to torpedo the nomination of a chief of general staff in 2010. He should have agreed to review what Harpaz said in 2012 against former army chief Lt. Gen. (res.) Gabi Ashkenazi, his former bureau chief Erez Weiner, former Israel Defense Forces' Spokesman Avi Benayahu and others, as then-State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss had suggested. Only later should Weinstein have considered letting Harpaz plead out the case. This approach should be adopted in the Pinto case as well. On the one hand, the rabbi should be prosecuted so that he is held accountable; on the other hand, Arviv's actions should be fully investigated.