Man accused of threatening judge conducts own defence in court

A man accused of threatening Judge Abigail Lofaro in a family court sitting last January, saying he would sleep on her doorstep if she ordered him to be evicted from his house, has claimed that it was “just an expression.”

57-year-old education officer Vincent Martin Carabott testified this morning before Magistrate Josette Demicoli. He was not assisted by a lawyer, and refused the court’s offer that one be appointed for him, saying that enough time had passed and he did not want further delays.

Today's sitting was an exercise in exasperation for the prosecution, the injured party and the court itself, caused entirely by Carabott’s insistence on conducting his own defence, in the absence of any knowledge of criminal law or the law of procedure. 

Carabott was recalcitrant and contemptuous from the moment he took to the stand. Asked if he was going to testify, the accused shrugged and replied that “if the court so wished”, he would. Magistrate Demicoli gently reminded him that, as the accused, he had a right to refuse to testify. 

He did eventually decide to testify and launched into a long-winded argument in which he claimed that the prosecution had “cut and pasted the parts of his statement which suited them". The accused said that he had told judge Lofaro that he was “a social case” who would have no place to sleep were he to be evicted. “I said I could sleep outside the court or the magistrate’s home.”

He alleged that he had not been given full disclosure of the evidence against him but prosecuting Inspector Sylvana Briffa interjected, saying that he was trying to mislead the court.

“He was given full disclosure of the evidence and I will not permit him to make this allegation again in court. This statement, which he took a long time to read, he eventually signed. Therefore, his entire testimony is intended to mislead the court. You are lying under oath,” said the inspector. He replied that he was willing to face the consequences if that was the case. 

Magistrate Demicoli asked whether he had been allowed to consult a lawyer before his interrogation. Clearly unwilling to give a direct yes or no answer, another five minutes of meandering non-sequiturs ensued. 

After being cut short, Carabott said he had not seen the charges in writing before he consulted with his lawyer, having only been informed of them verbally. “I went to my lawyer and told him that I was told that I am being accused of threatening the judge. He never gave me advice and our meeting took about ten minutes in all.”

The accused explained that he had expected a document, given the serious nature of the charges. “I never had an intention of harming the magistrate or her family...[now]I cannot even come to court to withdraw a document as I would be breaching my bail conditions. I told her ‘If I am thrown out onto the street, wouldn’t I come and sleep on your doorstep?’ It wasn’t a statement of intent. I was deprived of my liberty.”

“It is a figure of speech. Now if whenever I express myself I am insulting, as the parte civile is pointing out...I simply cannot understand,” he said sarcastically.  

Carabott's arrogant display and apparent intention to make up the procedure as he went along caused the normally implacable Joe Giglio -appearing as parte civile for Lofaro - to briefly lose his cool. “If you cannot understand, then engage a lawyer!” shouted Giglio. “There is a system that you must follow!”

Carabott was then asked if he had any further evidence. He began to repeat his allegations, but was stopped, after which he refused to answer. Asked again, he finally answered that he did not.

Giglio went straight to the heart of the matter in his reply. “You can beat around the bush and say that it is how you express yourself all you like, but it is a choice and you must bear the consequences of your choices. You cannot come here and brusquely tell my colleague that she is not impartial, that she is ignorant, and then simply say that this is how you express yourself.

"If we can now tell a magistrate the she is ignorant, that she doesn’t know the law, is taking sides and make innuendos and then say that this is how you explain yourself, our system will collapse entirely.”

The lawyer pointed out that the statement which the accused released to the police was a long one and shows that, in spite of him being repeatedly stopped by his own lawyer during questioning, he continued to repeat his allegations, indeed amplifying them.

“You are free to make insults and innuendoes, but must then bear responsibility for them.” He read from the police statement, in which he said he had also threatened to sleep on the judge’s doorstep.

"This is his statement, not in court,” he reminded the magistrate. “Therefore the challenge he made in the interrogation, he continued in court.”

“Here we have not one, but every element of the crime with which he is accused,” said the lawyer, as the accused made a sarcastic expression and nodded.

Giglio postulated that the “this is how I express myself” statement is not a defence. “Just because a person feels that saying ‘this is how he expresses himself’ allows it to threaten and insult others, it does not mean that this is so.”

The accused had exceeded the level of simple remonstration, said the lawyer, pointing out that this behaviour had continued from the previous sitting and was present today. “A civilised country is one where the citizen obeys the laws, otherwise the law of the jungle will apply. ...you may appeal, but once it is decided you must bow your head to the decision of the court.”

Giglio requested the court impose a higher degree of punishment, saying that the accused wanted to use the law as a doormat and this was dangerous and unacceptable, especially when this is also directed at all the judiciary.

Carabott, asked whether he had any further submissions, launched into another lengthy monologue. He congratulated Giglio on what he referred to as an "academic exercise", but said he absolutely disagreed with Giglio’s submissions which, he said, painted him to be a monster. “All I did was to draw the attention of the judge to aspects which were clearly imbalances.”

“If I don’t have anywhere to sleep, do I disappear from society? All I meant that everyone must bear the weight and consequences of his own decisions. What I meant was that I had no other place to stay,“ he said.

He asked the prosecution to indicate at what point he had threatened the judge, saying the context of what was being said had not been considered. “We are all part of society, who will bear the burden of homelessness? Isn’t it the nation?”

The court will deliver its sentence in October.