Trial over 2007 attempted murder to go ahead

The Court of Criminal Appeal has ordered the case against a man accused of shooting the son of father's former lover in 2007 to continue

The court dismissed the appeal and ordered the acts of the case to be remitted to the Criminal Court for trial
The court dismissed the appeal and ordered the acts of the case to be remitted to the Criminal Court for trial

The Court of Criminal Appeal has ordered the case against a man accused of shooting the son of father's former lover in 2007 to continue. 

Għarb resident Daniel Felice, had been charged with the attempted murder of a British man, Sean Holmes, in 2007.

Police had found Holmes near a phone booth at Cirkewwa, bleeding heavily from three gunshot wounds. Although he survived the shooting, Holmes is believed to still be suffering from conditions caused by his wounds.

Prosecutors claim that Holmes had gone to speak to Daniel Felice's father, Silvio, over his alleged physical abuse of his ex-partner, the Briton's mother, as a result of which she had suffered leg fractures. The men had an argument which escalated into fisticuffs and Holmes ended up being shot in the back, three times, with a pistol that was allegedly fired by Daniel Felice. Although he suffered serious injuries, Holmes had made his way to the Gozo ferry via taxi. The police were called after he was spotted with heavily blood-stained clothes at Ċirkewwa.

Felice had asked the court to order the removal of several terms from his bill of indictment, including reference to extramarital affairs, physical abuse and the narrative of how events had unfolded, saying that they were not backed up by the evidence and, rather, were the Attorney General's interpretation.

When his preliminary pleas were not accepted by the Criminal Court in September 2016, Felice had then filed an appeal.

In a decision handed down yesterday, the Court of Criminal Appeal presided by Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri, judge David Scicluna and judge Joseph Zammit McKeon also dismissed the pleas, together with the defence's objections to what Felice's lawyers referred to as “hearsay evidence,” saying it was the role of the trial judge to instruct jurors on how to interpret and evaluate various types of evidence.

“Now in this case, the accused is objecting to the part of Sean Holmes' testimony which makes reference to an alleged extra-marital relationship between his mother and the father of the accused. Although it is true that his mother was never asked to confirm the truth of this at the inquiry stage...and it is also true that there isn't the slightest proof in the acts of the fact to support the alleged wounds she suffered from Felice's father, what must be proven in this case...is not the veracity of this declaration by Sean Holmes, but to try and establish the motive that led Holmes to travel to Gozo and seek out Silvio Felice.”

Felice's legal team had also argued that the Holmes had not been saved by prompt medical assistance, as the prosecution had claimed, arguing that he had been admitted to hospital nearly 12 hours later and then, only because people had told the police that a blood-soaked man had been spotted at Cirkewwa.

A doctor at the Accident and Emergency Department had classified his wounds as slight, they argued, pointing out that he had added that there had been no life saving intervention, rather the man's wounds were simply cleaned and that he was released from hospital after three days.
 
The Attorney General was saying that elements of attempted homicide were present when these were just allegations, the defence claimed, asking that Sean Holmes be prohibited from testifying about the injuries he suffered and their aftermath.

The court, however, said it could not understand how it was supposed to prevent  a person who had allegedly suffered injuries in an attempted homicide from testifying about those injuries and their consequences. 

Ruling that decisions on the relevance or otherwise of evidence was always at the discretion of the trial judge, the court dismissed the appeal and ordered the acts of the case to be remitted to the Criminal Court for trial.