Bona murder | Defence insists fatal stabbing was ‘self-defence’

Defence lawyer Joe Giglio today told the jury trying Marsaxlokk monti hawker Allan Galea, accused of the murder of loan shark Anthony Borg ‘il-Bona’, that Galea had acted in lawful self-defence when he stabbed his victim in 2010, and asked them to mentally place themselves in Galea’s frame of mind during the moments before he fatally stabbed Borg.

“You are going to try and establish, to the grade of probability, whether the accused was acting in self-defence when he was stabbing the victim.”

The test to establish this was a subjective one, explained the lawyer.  “You need to transport yourself into the shoes of the accused and ask ‘what would I have done?’ What did Allan Galea understand from what he saw at the time, with the victim charging up the hill at him firing?”

MORE Reports from the Anthony Borg murder jury

The defence began its final address to the jurors after they had returned to the court from a visit to the area in which the killing took place, earlier today [WATCH jury access here].

The accused and the victim had scuffled, said Giglio. “But the accused is also seeing another thing. He is seeing Frans and Clifton coming, a short distance behind the victim.”

Pointing at the accused, the lawyer raised his voice. “Because of a choker. Because this donkey of an ignorant drinker dared joke around with ‘il-Bona’... three weeks before! Do you see why reputation is important?”

The lawyer suggested that the incident had been gnawing away at Anthony Borg’s pride before he decided to call the accused. “Just because three weeks before he was laughed at... then you drink, then you take some cocaine...” said Giglio, before referring to a witness’s description of Borg’s actions which the jury had heard in the past few weeks. “It was like he was possessed by a demon..." one had said. He wanted the accused’s number.

“PC853 had asked for the choker from Frans Borg. This same Frans Borg who imposed conditions on Inspector Pulliciono before returning the weapon, this same Frans Borg who wanted to impose on how Dr De Marco asked her questions. Understand how this so-called ‘marginal fact’ is relevant.”

In his roughly 90-minute address, Giglio made full use of psychology and rhetorical flourishes to hammer his point home. “Even the evidence of the family members has to be given full appreciation,” he explained, inviting the jury to evaluate their behaviour, conduct and consistency.

He asked the jurors to remember that this was Allan Galea’s case, not that of Borg. Borg had a right to life as much as any other citizen, the lawyer reminded the court. “Whilst many references had been made to the character and history of the victim, they had not been made to imply that he deserved to die, but to explain the background to certain decisions.”

Giglio reminded jurors of Borg’s charitable contributions. “As bad as he may have been, you must understand that the deceased had good and bad attributes... if ‘il-Bona’ had a right to life, why are we here? This man stabbed him to death. But every right brings with it responsibility and as much as he had a right to live, he absolutely did not have a right to place another’s life in jeopardy. The law gives a right to react in life-threatening circumstances.”

The evidence indicated that Borg had been cocking his handgun when Galea had rushed him, added the lawyer.

“There were people who had an interest in ruining the crime scene,” said the lawyer, “but they weren’t careful enough. In the place where Anthony Borg was found, from underneath him, a live bullet was recovered,” reminded the lawyer.

This fact had been testified to by forensic expert Dr Mario Scerri, who had turned over the body in the process of transporting it from the crime scene to the autopsy table.

“This live round would be difficult to place there,” said Giglio, also reminding the jury that Borg’s weapon had been hidden. “This means that centimetres away from where we were this morning, Borg’s actions were that of someone trying to fire a third shot. Explain to me who would want to fire a warning shot in the air when the person you want to scare off is less than a metre, metre and a half away?”

The defence concludes its submissions tomorrow morning.

Lawyers Lara Lanfranco and Kristina Debattista from the Attorney General's Office are leading the prosecution, while lawyer Giannella de Marco, Joe Giglio and Steven Tonna Lowell are defence counsel. Lawyers Franco Debono and Matthew Brincat are appearing parte civile for the family of the deceased.

Mr Justice Antonio Mizzi is presiding.