Shoplifter foiled by off-duty police inspector, denied bail

An alert off-duty police inspector thwarted a shoplifter and led to the offender’s arrest, a court has been told.

Tristan Falzon, 41, of Qormi, was arraigned before magistrate Rachel Montebello on Wednesday afternoon, accused of committing simple theft from a sportswear store in Qormi and voluntarily causing damage to the shop’s front door on 3 April. He was also charged with insulting and threatening two bystanders.

Falzon was further charged with having committed previous simple theft, this time from a supermarket in Sta Venera, on 31 March.

The defendant was accused of being a recidivist and breaching two sets of bail conditions.

Falzon has past convictions for theft and numerous news reports about him being charged with various thefts are available online.

The court appointed legal aid lawyer Josette Sultana to assist the defendant.

Inspector Roderick Agius, prosecuting together with Inspector Elisa Scicluna, told the court how he had been doing his shopping at the supermarket while off duty on 31 March and had noted the defendant bypassing the checkout and leaving the supermarket while carrying a bag of items.

Falzon had dropped the bag and ran away when the inspector had tried to stop him, he said.

Less than a week later, on 3 April, Falzon was recognised by staff while stealing items from a sportswear shop which he is charged with having robbed in the past, in separate proceedings.

Falzon was taken into custody when he went to sign a bail book at the police station.

Sultana suggested that the defendant had been “completely asleep” when his statement was being taken by the police, but the inspector said that the officers’ bodycam footage showed otherwise.

The inspector explained that after his arrest on 3 April, Falzon had spoken to lawyer David Gatt, who had also provided him with legal advice. When Falzon’s statement was about to be taken, sometime later, he asked to speak to the lawyer again.

“But as soon as I gave the order to handcuff him so he could be taken to the room where the consultation was going to take place, he told me that he did not want to speak to the lawyer.” Falzon had then signed a declaration to this effect, which was also recorded on bodycam, said the inspector.

His statement was taken the day after his last consultation with the lawyer, on 4 April at around 8:30pm, Inspector Agius said. Although he was offered the opportunity to speak to a lawyer again, he had refused.

Inspector Scicluna also testified about Falzon’s questioning, confirming Inspector Agius’ account, saying that the police had asked him whether he wanted to speak to a lawyer several times and that he had refused.

“While the statement was being taken, he did not say anything, but was moving his head. He was not asleep,” added the inspector. “We asked him, twice, whether he was OK and he said ‘yes, of course, yes of course.’”

The court, after hearing the inspectors confirm under oath that the defendant had been afforded all his legal rights during his arrest, ruled that although Falzon had not answered any questions, this did not mean that his arrest was invalid.

Asked how he would be pleading, the defence lawyer said her client was pleading not guilty and was requesting bail at this stage.

The prosecution objected, primarily on the ground of his trustworthiness, pointing to Falzon’s colourful criminal record, and violation of previous bail conditions.

“The last time he got bail was on March 21 this year and we are saying that 10 days later, he had committed another crime,” Inspector Agius submitted, adding that the sport shop he is accused of robbing is the same one that a court had prohibited him from approaching, as he had robbed it already.

A bystander who had chased the defendant and tried to detain him had been threatened by the accused, he added. “I don’t think he has the will or capacity to obey any bail conditions,” concluded the inspector.

Sultana reminded the court that Falzon was still presumed innocent at this stage. “One charge is a contravention and the other two are simple theft. I don’t think he should be remanded in custody on these charges, as other safeguards can be put in place by the court,” submitted the lawyer.

The court, however, denied bail saying that it was not satisfied that Falzon could provide the necessary guarantees at this stage.

Inspectors Roderick Agius and Elisa Scicluna prosecuted.