Defence claims husband had motive to punish woman in ‘satanic’ sex ruse

The defence counsel for the man on trial accused of exploiting a dysfunctional family and coercing them into performing humiliating sex acts, told a court his client “had no motive to do so, but his girlfriend’s long-suffering father did.”

Lawyer Mario Mifsud began his closing arguments on Friday morning as the trial enters its final furlong. “The accused should not be in the dock. I believe that other persons should be here in his stead.”

The man is charged with aggravated rape of the mother, the statutory rape of a minor, her 15-year-old daughter, threats, depriving them of their liberty and keeping them against their will, and forcing the elder daughter to commit a non-consensual act of sexual violence against her mother, amongst others – facing between 12-40 years in jail for each of the crimes.

Mifsud argued that the family had been hurt by the mother, who neglected her husband and children while pursuing seuxal relations with strangers. “They all had a motive for seeking revenge on her and they got revenge through the things she used to like – the occult,” Mifsud told Madame Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera.

Mifsud said two “key players” – the mother’s husband and a lover – in the tale of horrific sex abuse had not been brought to testify by the prosecution and highlighted the absence of medical or scientific evidence to support the claims made by the family. “I don’t know if the accused was somehow drawn into this… only God, the devil, [the husband] and [the mother] know the truth, but science tells us that the broomsticks were not introduced to the mother’s body. Therefore there is doubt, which runs in favour of the accused.”

Mifsud said no magisterial inquiry had taken place to preserve any evidence. “The point of an inquiry is to have an independent magistrate – who will never be asked to decide the merits of the case – to gather all the testimony and evidence a tempo vergine.”

In the absence of an inquiry, it was up to this court to examine all of the evidence, he said – “starting with the evidence that wasn’t exhibited.”

Mifsud said the husband had endured suffering from his wife, whom he identified as being an assistant principal in the public service and therefore “requiring a certain level of education”.

“She knows what she is doing. Her husband, this poor man was cheated upon time and again,” Mifsud said, and suggested that the entire family was in on a ruse. “They started off well, sticking to their script, but when you confront them with something they weren’t prepared for, they get stuck. We wait 15 seconds and then they say they don’t remember.”

Mifsud said the prosecution’s failure to bring the husband to testify was a serious shortcoming.

“He has a motive to want to harm the mother. He was reduced to an object of ridicule in his village. Then we have the famous lover. Another important figure in this case, who was described as insane... He could also have been the victim of rape himself... The prosecution said they couldn’t trace him. He could be alive or he could be dead, but the result is that the defence did not have the opportunity to cross-examine him either,” said the lawyer.

Mifsud added that the wife’s lover was apparently a friend of the husband, who would loan him money.

And an alleged ‘Satanic priest’ and fortune-teller consulted by the wife too was not brought in to testify. “He also had sex with the mother… I’m sure he’s a very gentle lover,” Mifsud remarked.

Not even the grandfather mentioned in the case had been asked to testify. “The grandfather might have helped, but he wasn’t brought to testify,” Mifsud said. The lawyer suggested that his age made him a risk of slipping up.

Mifsud said that certain fingerprints and DNA samples, had not been taken from the scene of the crime, pointing out that the mother had been claimed to being ordered by the ‘demon’ to have sex on a desk. “They weren’t exactly the type of family to keep everywhere spick and span.”

Mifsud insisted that the alleged rape with a broomstick was “a complete invention”, saying that despite allegations that it persisted for 25 minutes “no scratches or abrasions were suffered”; he added that no such injuries were noted when the mother had been examined upon her admission to Mount Carmel Hospital.

The lawyer said the accused’s ex-girlfriend, the younger daughter, had already admitted to perjury charges when first giving evidence, calling her a liar. “I believe she lied here again. She is ready to put people in trouble,” Mifsud told the court, claiming she had not broken up with the accused, now in custody in prison.

He said all the victims were capable of recording video or taking photos with their phones, yet no evidence was at hand for an expert’s comparison of the alleged ‘demon’ voice heard in the house. “Had the victims realised that he was making the voice, wouldn’t they all have turned on him and told him where to stick the broomstick, where to throw the bucket of water…?”

He refuted claims that he held the family against their will, because all victims testified to being able to leave the house.

Mifsud also told the judge that the mother had texted the accused, in messages that had been preserved as evidence, telling him that she would change her account of the allegations if he did not reconcile with her daughter.

Mifsud insisted that it was her husband who had an interest “in bringing the devil into the story” because a mobile phone video had him asking a question, to his wife, not as to whether she had been hurt “but whether the demon would let her have sex with him that night... he even told her ‘don’t you know who is giving you the money?’, practically admitting that he knew it was not the accused.”