Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1449240
NEWS 5 maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 9 FEBRUARY 2022 interrogate' victim about stolen van seen "some blood on his mouth." Carlos was sitting inside his own car at the time. "It wasn't any of my business," said the woman. Asked whether she recognised anyone in the courtroom, she re- plied before the prosecutor had finished the question. "I don't know anyone, whether he was fat, thin, nothing!" A petrol pump attendant from Fgura also testified. He instantly bristled at being asked his details and whether he was an employee, asking the prosecutor why he was asking him all these questions and earning a rebuke from the magistrate. "They brought me here and I don't know, and I have nothing to do with these things. The po- lice came to gather CCTV. I gave them access, I don't know how to modify these things," protested the witness. The footage was about a white vehicle, which had briefly stopped at the pump before driv- ing off, whilst he had been inside the office as there were no cli- ents, he said. Lawyer Giannella De Marco interrupted, saying that there was no need for the witness to be asked to interpret the footage. The magistrate asked him whether the vehicle had stopped. He replied that he had been packing items inside and walked outside to give the vehicle fuel, but the van had driven off in a "fraction of a second," and had not taken on any fuel, he went on. "The van stopped for petrol, I assume," said the man. There had been other employees in the car wash and tyre changing stations, but only he was dealing with the pumps, he confirmed. "There was nothing. It was normal for this to happen, may- be he realised he had no money on him," insisted the witness. Asked whether he knew who the van belonged to, he insisted that he hadn't seen it. He denied seeing the CCTV footage, as "as far as I'm concerned, nothing happened." De Marco objected several times, saying that there was no need for the witness to tell us what he saw in the film. The magistrate overruled the lawyer, saying that it was relevant at this stage. "What was the reason they left again, from the footage?" asked prosecuting lawyer Karl Muscat from the Office of the Attorney General. "I saw it when the po- lice showed it to me," replied the witness. "I saw the van stop and a person getting out of the van and running away." "Did anyone else emerge from the van?" He asked. "Yes. One, from the back too." The prosecutor asked him why he had just told the court the opposite, under oath. "I am talking about the film that I saw. At the time I saw nobody except the van stopping for fuel. Don't try to trip me up!" the witness shouted at the prosecutor. Muscat then asked how the van had driven off when the driver had just got out. "I saw that on the footage, at the time I didn't [see anything]. I saw everything now with the police." "The video speaks for itself, why are you asking me? Don't ask me what I saw with the po- lice, ask them!" shouted the wit- ness. Defence lawyers Michael Scir- iha and Steven Tonna Lowell criticised the questions being asked, but were given short shrift by the court. Cross-examination was re- served. Shouting and crying in pain Another witness then took the stand, telling the court that he did not know the victim. "I was down in the garage where I work, right across from where the incident happened." He didn't have an address for the garage as it was in a field, he said. "I heard someone shouting, like he was crying in pain and I went to see what was going on. I went to look. There was a white van, I don't remember the mod- el, parked across the road, Triq it-Taghbija. It was parked in the main road, I don't know if you can do that, it was blocking a car. A Mercedes… like grey?" He said he didn't know who the Mercedes belonged to. "I thought they were joking, to be honest, as they weren't so aggressive," said the witness. Asked who he was talking about, he replied: "there were peo- ple walking by, two or three, I couldn't see properly." "What were they doing?" "When I was looking, I saw no type of violence. But then some- thing happened and the van's door closed and it drove off." Whatever happened had taken place behind the van, where he couldn't see, claimed the wit- ness. The defence argued that the prosecution was pressuring the witness "by standing close to him." "I want to make it clear that I don't know anyone of these peo- ple," said the witness, seemingly taking the cue. "I don't know these people, completely, no idea. When a po- lice officer came and asked me who these people are and what they have, I said I didn't know anything. I don't even have Face- book." He didn't know who Car- los Schembri was, he insisted. "I heard the van's slide door slam shut, I don't know what happened and what didn't." The people had been beside the van, three of them left, another dark skinned one turned around the corner and disappeared, he said. The defence raised an objec- tion to Muscat confronting the reluctant witness with his origi- nal statement, as it had not been exhibited in the proceedings. Muscat then asked the witness to describe any of the persons who were there. "I didn't see an- yone. I only saw one man after the van left, going around the corner." Lawyer Shaun Zammit, ap- pearing parte civile for Schem- bri, asked the witness to describe that man. "He was dark skinned." Asked to point him out in court, he indicated Jeremy Borg, albeit not with certainty. Amongst the other witnesses to testify was a Transport Mal- ta representative, who exhibit- ed information about a white Peugeot Expert Traveller van, registered to Christian Borg, under Princess Garage. "This is a rental registration," he said. Another foreign numberplate he had been asked to run searches on, had never been registered in Malta, the court was told. Bail granted to all accused bar one After the witnesses had ten- dered their evidence to the court, lawyer Giannella De Mar- co asked for bail for her client Christian Borg. Lawyer Michael Sciriha, also for Borg, told the court that it was "evident" that Borg qualified for bail. Parte civile lawyer Shaun Zammit interjected, saying that Schembri's sister was outside the courtroom, terrified. He was shouted down by the defence lawyers for addressing the court when he had no right of audi- ence. Lawyer Stephen Tonna Lowell suggested that she might be terrified "because she had not told the truth," arguing that be- sides, there were controls which could be put in place. Lawyer Franco Debono sub- mitted that the witness evi- dence had now been conserved and that he had no doubt that the magistrate would calibrate bail conditions as necessary. He lauded the court for hearing evi- dence so swiftly. But the prosecution countered these submissions, Muscat argu- ing that there although the wit- nesses had testified, he had giv- en more serious reasons for the court to refuse bail. He pointed out that the inquiry was still open and there were still oppor- tunities for the accused to tam- per with evidence. "There were a few develop- ments over the past few days. With Jeremy Borg acting as he had in this court. This begs the question as to if he was acting in this manner in court, how will he act outside." Borg stood up and leaned over to someone, be- fore being pulled down. Muscat was stopped by the court, when he referenced reve- lations about the accused which had surfaced in the media, link- ing the accused to Luke Milton. "No media. We are in a court of law," said the magistrate. Mus- cat asked that the accused be remanded in custody until the magisterial inquiry is conclud- ed and Luke Milton is charged, saying that the accused would "definitely breach their bail con- ditions." Lawyer Franco Debono dis- missed this as "conjecture" and pointed out that Burton had obeyed his bail conditions. De Marco quoted her father, the late Prof. Guido De Marco, as saying that "human rights, if not translated into action, re- main words etched in marble." She said she was sorry if the woman was terrified, although pointing out that she had tes- tified without difficulty, but pointed out that her client had gone to the police himself and had given them the location of the stolen items. She denied that he had threatened anyone. Borg had not breached any court orders and had provided a third-party guarantor. Even though the other accused had been granted bail, there had been no threats or breaches of bail. The court could also impose a protection order, suggested the lawyer. For Jeremy Borg, lawyer Jason Grima argued that he was the least person involved in the in- cident. With regards to his other client, Tyson Grech, he said the victim's sister had lied during her testimony today and that he would be exploring further ac- tion against her. Bail and prima facie evidence for bill of indictment The court granted bail to Christian Borg, ordering him to surrender his ID card and pass- port. He was prohibited from speaking to, directly or indirect- ly, the prosecution's witnesses. He has to sign twice weekly at St Julian's police station and must observe a curfew between 11pm and 6am. Bail was granted against a deposit of €3,000 and a personal guarantee of €5,000. A protection order in favour of Schembri and his family was al- so issued. Borg was also forbid- den from following Schembri, approaching his home or con- tacting him on pain of a €7,000 fine, imprisonment of up to two years or both imprisonment and fine. The court also granted bail un- der similar conditions to Jeremy Borg, who told the court that he did not have an ID card or a passport. Bail was denied to Tyson Grech as he was not deemed sufficient- ly trustworthy. The remaining accused had been granted bail in the last sitting. The court decreed that it had seen sufficient prima facie evi- dence of guilt to allow a bill of indictment to be issued.