Alleged screwdriver attack charges fall apart as court deems evidence insufficient

A man was acquitted of charges that he grievously injured another man with a screwdriver and stole his mobile phone, after the court ruled that the prosecution had not reached the standard of proof required in criminal proceedings.

Police had received a report of a fight near the Ħal Luqa cemetery.

The victim, Nazzareno Zarb, told officers that he had returned to his van to retrieve something he thought he had left inside. While there, he noticed the accused, Stephen Cutajar, standing next to the vehicle, allegedly holding his mobile phone.

When he confronted him, Cutajar allegedly ran to his truck, grabbed a screwdriver with a blue handle, and attacked him, causing multiple injuries to his face and body. After a scuffle, Zarb claimed he managed to wrestle the screwdriver away from him.

Later that same day, Zarb went to the police station and filed his own report, presenting a medical certificate certifying that he had suffered injuries. 

In his statement, Cutajar rebutted the accusations and claimed he had bent down to look for his keys under the dashboard when Zarb suddenly appeared and threw a stone at him, demanding €100.  He claimed that it was Zarb who then grabbed a thick screwdriver from the truck and tried to attack him, but that he managed to take it away. According to Cutajar, Zarb then picked up another stone and threw it at his back.

The argument ended, Cutajar said, when he agreed to give Zarb €90 in exchange for getting his keys back. Zarb then allegedly demanded “€10,000 for the scratches” he had suffered.

Cutajar also stated that he already knew Zarb, and that they had mutual acquaintances. He recalled a previous incident near the Flamingo restaurant where Zarb and his son had asked him for €100, which he said he paid. He claimed Zarb was now pressing him for money linked to an old debt involving Cutajar’s former partner, who allegedly owed Zarb money.

Most crucially, Cutajar denied ever taking Zarb’s mobile phone. Inspector Jonathan Cassar testified that while Zarb had initially claimed his mobile phone had been stolen, he later informed police that when he returned to the scene of the attack, the phone was lying on the ground.

At the scene, Cutajar also pointed out a stone which he said Zarb had thrown at him, which appeared to have red staining on it, possibly blood. He indicated another stone behind a fence which he alleged had also been thrown at him.

Court-appointed forensic expert Mario Scerri concluded that Zarb had suffered a laceration on the left side of the scalp caused by a blunt but pointed instrument, compatible with a screwdriver, bruising on the right ear, and several abrasions on the right hand and right elbow, consistent with blunt trauma.

He concluded that Zarb’s injuries were broadly compatible with being struck by a screwdriver and other blunt impacts.

Cutajar also suffered a laceration on the right ear caused by blunt trauma with a pointed instrument, again compatible with a screwdriver.

When the Attorney General issued the note of referral for judgment, listing the legal provisions under which Cutajar was to be tried, the prosecution did not reserve the right to present further evidence.

This meant the court could not delay proceedings to hear additional witnesses, including the alleged victim, and was bound to decide the case on the basis of the evidence already on record. At that stage, Zarb had not testified, and the court could not hear him. As a result, the only evidence directly bearing on the incident was Cutajar’s statement, the police officers’ testimony and reports and he medical and forensic evidence.

In the absence of the alleged victim’s testimony and without any corroborating civilian eyewitnesses, the court held that the evidential threshold required by law had not been met.

The court acquitted Stephen Cutajar of all charges.