GBH between friends ends in reconciliation

Today saw a rare happy ending to a case of grievous bodily harm as a man, who had a violent falling out with his friend, reconciled with the victim and was spared prison.

Jesmond Micallef, 29, of Qormi had been accused of grievously injuring Carmel Tabone at Valletta’s Laboratory Wharf in 2014 following an argument about customs documentation.

Tabone had told Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera how on 12 April 2014 he had been working as a security guard at Laboratory Wharf when he had stopped Micallef, who had been driving a trailer. He had not allowed him to leave because Micallef had missing documentation and had asked him to move his vehicle to the side so as not to block traffic. At that point, the accused had alighted from his cabin and punched Tabone in the face, breaking one of his teeth.

Medical certificates confirmed the injury, which is deemed grievous at law.

Micallef, who opted not to testify in these proceedings, had told police the contrary: that Tabone had attacked him and had to be held back by three officials. He argued that the man’s tooth had already been broken before the altercation and denied punching the security guard.

Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera, in her judgment on the matter, observed that the Criminal Code states that a single reliable witness is sufficient evidence if believed by the court. Circumstantial evidence are often more important than direct evidence, said the court, but must be examined thoroughly to ensure they are all unequivocal in their indications and must form an unbroken chain that leads in the same direction.

The court observed that it was faced with two diametrically opposed versions of events: one that Tabone was attacked whilst checking documentation and the accused’s claim that he had been attacked by the official. The difference was that the accused claimed that the incident took place in the presence of several people, whilst the alleged victim said it had occurred when the men were alone.

“Therefore it undoubtedly depends on the credibility of the witnesses and the court must take into account the behaviour, criminal record and character of the witnesses, and whether the testimony is borne out by other evidence in deciding whether they are speaking the truth.”

The court observed that Tabone had shown the court his broken tooth and that the injury had been certified by an emergency doctor at the time. The accused had no explanation as to how the complainant had ended up injured and said that despite allegedly being attacked, he had not felt the need to seek medical assistance.

In the circumstances, the court said it felt the version of events given by Tabone was more truthful and therefore upheld it. The grievous nature of the injury was also certified by a doctor, noted the court, and this worked in his favour.

But the court also observed that the complainant had expressed his willingness to forgive the accused and that the two were now friends again. In view of this, the court said, it did not feel the ideal punishment was imprisonment. Instead, the magistrate handed Micallef a 3 year conditional discharge.

It abstained from deciding a request for a protection order due to the fact that the men were now on friendly terms again, deeming the prosecution’s request for a protection order as no longer necessary.

Inspector Hubert Cini prosecuted.