Court overturns elderly woman’s conviction for 'misappropriation' of tombola funds

A 70-year-old woman from Żebbuġ has had her conviction for misappropriation overturned on appeal, with the judge noting that the prosecution’s evidence was “very weak.”

Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera revoked the woman’s two-year prison sentence, which had been suspended for four years and revoked her perpetual general interdiction.

Philippa Borg, who had been Officer in Charge at the Dingli day care centre was cleared of misappropriation, misuse of government funds, making a false declaration as a public official and knowingly making use of forged documents.

Borg had been accused of misappropriating the proceeds of a tombola which had been organised at the day care centre, after an MCAST student filed a police report.

The accused had been a part-time social assistant with the Ministry for Social Policy at the Dingli centre, which would organise various activities for the elderly, amongst them a popular tombola. Borg was responsible for the sale of tombola tickets.

No receipts for the tickets would be given, but after the draw, a document would be filled in with the amounts earned in ticket sales and those paid out as winnings. The takings were then used to cover costs at the centre.

Between October and November 2008, an MCAST student on work-experience had told her lecturers that she had observed several irregularities at the centre, among them that Borg would declare €10 less than the actual amount of earnings from the tombola.

The lecturers informed the director of MCAST, who informed the director of the government department in charge of elderly care in the community, who informed the police.

Two of Borg’s assistants had also alleged that the woman would declare less money than the actual takings and would separate the money into two empty butter tubs to make it appear less.

The police had also received other reports from members of staff at the day care centre as well as local councillors.

On their part, Borg’s lawyers attacked the credibility of the student. Borg had explained that she would often argue about politics with the mother of the student who had filed the report.

The Court of Appeal noted discrepancies between what the student had told her lecturers and the actual facts, disproving allegations that the accused alone would sign the statement of the day’s takings, when in fact they were countersigned by at least two other persons and then reviewed.

The judge also observed that the student had not bothered to tell her lecturers about the allegations during their visits, where they would have been able to see for themselves whether the allegations were true. Furthermore, the court said “none of the witnesses had testified with reference to a particular time but had all testified lightly without placing the facts in a timeframe.” The Judge highlighted the lack of credibility of the student, as well as the fact that prosecution witnesses had not corroborated her testimony.

While there may have been, some administrative shortcomings surrounding the way the tombola’s takings were gathered and its bookkeeping, these “certainly did not amount to the criminal offence in the charges, much more so when taking into account the fact that the accounts as written, were approved by the accused’s director,” said the court, overturning the conviction and revoking the perpetual general interdiction levied against the woman by the first court.

Lawyers Franco Debono, Kathleen Calleja Grima and Francesca Zarb appeared for Borg.