Court acquits two of operating unlicensed slot machines in case dating back to 2006

Two men have been acquitted of operating illegal slot machines at a Marsa bar in a case dating back to 2006, years after the laws under which they had been charged were repealed.

Anthony Gafa and Raymond Brincat had been charged on March 8, 2006, with having installed slot machines without a permit to do so, operating an unlicensed casino at Rocky Bar in Marsa, as well as other charges relating to the promotion of illegal gambling activities.

In a decision handed down earlier this month by Magistrate Natasha Galea Sciberras, who took over the case after the retirement of the original magistrate, the court began by observing that the charges had been issued in terms of the old Gaming Act, and the Lotteries and Other Games Act, both of which had been repealed in 2018 and replaced by the new Gaming Act.

It also noted that in terms of that legislation, most of the charges could only be filed with the permission of the Attorney General, which permission was not found in the case file.

In 2006, the court had heard prosecuting inspector, now Superintendent Raymond Aquilina, testify to how the police had raided the bar, acting on a tip off, finding several men hiding in an upstairs room where TVs were showing horse races happening in the UK.

The machines had been found in a different room on the premises. Although nobody was playing them at the time, they were plugged in and switched on. The machines’ cash boxes and the LM45.80 (€106.68) they contained had been exhibited in court.

The defendants had released statements during their interrogation without being assisted by a lawyer, as this right had not yet been introduced into Maltese law. Making reference to a long chain of more recent judgments which declared the use of such statements to breach the fundamental human rights of persons accused, the court disregarded them.

Brincat’s had chosen to testify, telling the court that he had leased the slot machines, which he described as amusement machines, and not gambling ones, from Gafa, in terms of a written agreement.

But because of the expunging of the statements released by the two accused men and in view of the fact that the testimony of a co-accused was not evidence against the other person accused, the remaining evidence only showed that Anthony Gafaˋ had been present in the part of the premises where the four machines were found when the police raided the bar. This meant that Gafa’s involvement was not proven to the level required by law.

With regards to Brincat, the court noted that he had testified to having imported the machines and had leased them to Gafa’ for use at the bar. But the charges required the court to assess the “nature and use” of the four machines and, noted the magistrate, besides Inspector Aquilina’s testimony, only the sergeant who had photographed them and a court expert appointed by the previous magistrate had mentioned them in their testimony.

And although Brincat had testified to having supplied the machines, he had insisted that they were not gambling machines, but amusement machines, claiming to have been issued a permit to operate them - which had not been exhibited as evidence.

Additionally, the laws cited specifically excluded amusement machines from their remit, noted the court in its decision to acquit the defendants of all charges.

Lawyers Jose Herrera and Kristina Camilleri DeGuara were defence counsel.