[WATCH] Mintoff Bland's partner suspected infidelity, stabbed her and later himself, court told

Gheorghe Popa, 39, arraigned in court charged with stabbing Yana Mintoff Bland and her son, Daniel Mainwaring • ‘Feeling that he had lost everything, stabbed himself and set the house on fire’

Gheorghe Popa, 39, arraigned in court (Photo: Chris Mangion/MediaToday)
Gheorghe Popa, 39, arraigned in court (Photo: Chris Mangion/MediaToday)
Gheorghe Popa, 39, charged in court over Mintoff Bland stabbing

Gheorghe Popa, 39, has been charged with stabbing his partner Yana Mintoff Bland – the 65-year-old daughter of former Labour prime minister Dom Mintoff – and her son, Daniel Mainwaring, in a fit of paranoid rage.

Popa, from Romania, appeared before magistrate Gabriella Vella wearing bed slippers, tracksuit bottoms and a t-shirt, having been taken into custody directly from hospital.

Inspector Spiridione Zammit said that the accused had been treated in ITU and another ward since then. He was arrested at Mater Dei Hospital as he was about to be released. “Before we interrogated the accused, he was medically certified as being fit to be questioned.”

Mintoff Bland and Mainwaring, 32, suffered stab wounds at around 10pm on October 24th in an alleged domestic dispute at the Mintoff residence in Tarxien.


Mintoff Bland suffered slight stab wounds to her chest and wrist during the argument while her son is understood to have been stabbed twice in the thigh while attempting to protect his mother.

Popa, found by the police hiding in a tree behind the Tarxien villa, suffered stab wounds to his abdomen. Members of the Civil Protection Department had also been called in as the residence had been set on fire.

According to Mintoff Bland’s lawyer Joe Giglio, the magisterial inquiry found that Popa had stabbed himself and set the house on fire.

Popa is charged with detaining Mintoff Bland against her will, attempting to grievously injure her, slightly injuring her and her son with a bladed instrument, carrying a weapon during the commission of a crime against the person, carrying a knife in public without a police licence, attacking Mintoff Bland and her son with a knife and uttering verbal threats.

Popa was also accused of harassing the woman, causing her to fear he would use violence against her in the months leading up to the stabbing, arson and causing criminal damage.

Popa told the court that he would be turning 39 tomorrow. Asked where he lived, he told the court that he lived “with Yana”.

Defence lawyer Benjamin Valenzia entered a plea of not guilty on behalf of the accused.

The man had been claimed to be on psychiatric medication, but no evidence of this was presented in court. Valenzia explained that the accused had refused to take it. He requested the accused be released on bail.

But Inspector Zammit objected to this. “His residence is the same place where the incident happened. He furnished us with a different address to the one where he resides,” he argued.

Gigilo, appearing parte civile for the victims, reminded the magistrate that the arraignment was taking place today simply because the accused had been undergoing medical treatment.

He pointed to the accused's first statement to the police: “It transpires that this incident occurred because the accused was feeling...annoyed...that the parte civile wanted to terminate the relationship which the accused suspected to be because of infidelity. As a result of this, two persons suffered stab wounds. The magisterial inquiry established that after this happened, the accused had gone to a particular area and, feeling that he had lost everything, stabbed himself and set the house on fire.”

Granting bail at this time would be “very premature,” Gilgio added, because of what he described as an “imminent risk” of further criminal acts. “The point is that when they returned from hospital, they found the whole house on fire.”

Valenzia explained that the man's employer had set up a separate living arrangement for the accused, but the court refused bail, giving as its main reason the fact that the accused had given the victim's address as his place of residence.