Pair acquitted of €143,000 theft from Lidl

Two men have been acquitted over a theft of over €143,000 from a Lidl shop in San Ġwann.

35-year-old Andrea Buzza from Gudja was acquitted of a €143,412 theft from the establishment, while Sandro Vella, 46 of Marsascala was also cleared of complicity in the theft.

Vella had been charged with supplying tools or weapons that were used in the commission of the offence and for knowingly receiving stolen items.

The case dates back to 2012.

A key testimony came from Clinton Bugeja Camilleri, who worked with Lidl as a district manager and was responsible for various of the store outlets. He described Lidl’s inventory system, explaining products entered into the system and sold items would automatically be deducted, making it possible to identify discrepancies. Inventory checks were carried out monthly.

According to his testimony, discrepancies began to appear over several months, particularly at the San Ġwann Lidl store, where items appeared to be missing. Because of these discrepancies, internal verifications were carried out.

During these checks, he was informed by an individual about suspicious activity allegedly taking place at night. Pallets containing Lidl products were being removed from the premises, placed in the lift and taken to the car park. Among the persons mentioned in this context was Andrea Buzza, an employee of the company.

A police report was lodged concerning the alleged theft of goods by Camilleri and a police investigation commenced. Several persons were arrested and interrogated in connection with the case, including Sandro Vella, whose shop was searched and various items were found.

Rosanna Debattista, another inspector involved in the case, explained she had investigated the matter and arrested persons in connection with it. She said various products had been collected from several shops, including Red Bull drinks, which were allegedly intended for Lidl. She confirmed no lawyer of trust was present during the interrogations of these persons.

A major part of the judgment dealt with the admissibility and evidential value of the statements made by the accused during the investigation stage.

Under the law as it stood at that time, he had the right to consult a lawyer of his choice for one hour before interrogation, whether by phone or face-to-face. He exercised that right and consulted a lawyer. However, he was not given the right to have legal assistance during the interrogation itself, because that right had not yet entered into Maltese law.

Vella nevertheless answered all questions put to him, including incriminating ones.

Andrea Buzza also gave a similar statement. Like Vella, he had the right at the time to consult a lawyer beforehand, but he waived that right. He too did not have the right to legal assistance during interrogation because the law had not yet changed. He also cooperated and answered all questions, including incriminating ones.

The court then carried out an extensive legal analysis on whether such statements should be relied upon. It emphasized where statements made without legal assistance during interrogation contain seriously incriminating material, the danger of unfairness becomes much greater.

It was accepted both accused had been warned that they had the right not to answer questions and anything they said could be used as evidence against them.

Even so, the court held that this did not automatically make the statements admissible, especially where the prosecution’s case relied heavily on them. For these reasons and particularly because the statements contained matters that could seriously prejudice the accused, the court held that it would be prudent to declare the statements inadmissible.

Having set aside the statements, the court then examined the remaining evidence. It noted although several witnesses had testified and several police officers had described the investigation, no clear and direct evidence linked the accused to the offences of theft or receiving stolen property.

The investigative inspector had testified various items allegedly belonging to Lidl were recovered but this allegation was not properly supported through formal production of evidence before the court. Reference had also been made to inventory documents showing missing items but those documents were never formally exhibited as evidence in the proceedings, and no request had been made for the appointment of a competent expert to examine the recovered goods and determine either their nature or whether they actually belonged to Lidl.

The court therefore found that the prosecution had relied mainly on the accused’s own statements, without presenting sufficient independent or corroborative evidence tying them to the alleged crimes.

No criminal record appeared was produced for Buzza, while Sandro Vella’s criminal record showed only two previous minor matters.

The court ultimately concluded the prosecution had failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

As a result, both Andrea Buzza and Sandro Vella were acquitted of all guilt.

Inspector Rosanna Debattista prosecuted.

Lawyers Jason Grima and Yanika Bugeja appeared for the two accused. Magistrate Caroline Farrugia Frendo presided over the case.