Sion Grech murder: crucial eyewitness testimony contradicted by experts, defence argue

Lawyers for one of the men on trial for the murder of Sion Grech have questioned a woman’s claim to have witnessed the killing.

Edward Gatt, together with lawyer Ishmael Psaila is defence counsel to Ismael Habesh, who is on trial for the murder of Grech in Marsa in 2005 together with Faical Mahouachi from Tunisia.

Gatt told the jurors that Jacqueline Rapinett’s account of having seen the accused stabbing Grech to death did not stand up to scrutiny.

“If you believe what Dr. Mario Scerri testified to [this morning], that the victim was not murdered in the place where her body was found, then Rapinett did not tell the truth.”

Gatt said that the defence was not trying to justify the “barbaric and savage murder” of the 20-year-old sex worker, but was exercising rights granted to the accused by the Republic of Malta.

The veteran lawyer described the case against the defendants as one “full of prejudices,” in particular against drug addicts.

“We also have people of horrible character. Also, the place mentioned, Marsa, the area. A person stabbed to death - ‘here we go, a Libyan.’” 

He urged jurors to put aside any prejudices they might have about the nationality of the accused men and to make their decision solely on the basis of the evidence before them.

“Don’t think that when Maltese people committed murder, they didn’t do it with a knife, too. There are people who feel a sense of discomfort when they see a Libyan.” 

Stressing that the fact the Attorney General had issued the bill of the indictment after analysing the evidence did not mean that they should unquestioningly bow their heads and accept the prosecution’s arguments, the lawyer told the jury to ask themselves whether the evidence before them led them to believe it was probably the truth.

“If it is more likely that Sion Grech was not murdered where her body was found but had been brought there, if you think that this is probably what happened, then it means that Rapinett’s account of events is a lie.”

Rapinett’s story was complete confusion, argued the lawyer.

“The versions of events she gave did not agree with each other,” Gatt said, reminding the jurors that unless they were satisfied that the case had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, they must acquit the accused. “Apart from the fact that she contradicted herself, all of the circumstances surrounding the case contradict her too.”

Even the date of Sion Grech’s demise was still subject to debate, he said, pointing to the fact that the Bill of Indictment specified April 5, when witnesses had told the court Grech had been seen alive on April 6. 

All of the women who had testified had contradicted Rapinett, said the lawyer. “Does this happen in real life? When you see someone being stabbed, do you leave to service a client?”

Gatt argued that although the prosecution was claiming the two men were equally guilty, it was reasonable to conclude that one was the principal and the other, his accomplice. But to be complicit in a crime, both participants had to have the same intention - referred to as a “common design.” Rapinett had claimed that both of the accused men had carried out the murder, she did not say she was sure about one of the accused and less about the other, the lawyer said.

“But if in you are thinking that only one of them is guilty, and have doubts about one more than the other, this means that Rapinett’s story is not truthful.”

The defence argued that the accused had not murdered Grech, suggesting that Rapinett was attempting to cover up for someone else. He asked why the police had stressed the drug use angle so much and what had allegedly motivated Habesh to murder the sex worker.

“Because of his wife? His wife and Sion Grech had already confronted each other face to face in Hamrun.”

The trial continues tomorrow.