Footballer Jurgen Pisani acquitted of match-fixing on appeal, 15-month jail term overturned

The Court of Appeal challenged the disproportionate weight given to deleted WhatsApp messages and the overall credibility of the prosecution’s main witness

Jurgen Pisani
Jurgen Pisani

The Court of Criminal Appeal has quashed Jurgen Pisani’s 15-month prison sentence, clearing the footballer of all charges relating to attempting to manipulate a Malta Premier League football match in 2024. 

Judge Neville Camilleri has cleared footballer Jurgen Pisani of match-fixing charges, overturning a 15-month prison sentence and a decade-long sports ban after ruling that the initial conviction was not legally or reasonably supported by the evidence provided. 

The case centered on a decisive fixture between Santa Luċija and Birkirkara played on 3 May 2024. At the time, Santa Luċija desperately needed a win to avoid relegation. The prosecution had alleged that Pisani offered Birkirkara striker Maxuell Maia €2,000 to ensure he did not score during the match, which ultimately ended in a 2–2 draw.

Pisani appealed his conviction, with his legal team arguing that the first court's appreciation of the evidence was legally unsustainable and failed to reach the required threshold of proof beyond reasonable doubt. He specifically challenged the disproportionate weight given to deleted WhatsApp messages and the overall credibility of the prosecution’s main witness.

During the initial proceedings, Maia had testified that Pisani repeatedly approached him on the pitch, asking him “yes or no” to the €2,000 offer while covering his mouth. Maia claimed he never responded to the proposal.

In its judgment, the court methodically addressed the pillars of the prosecution's case, beginning with the controversial WhatsApp chats between Jurgen Pisani and teammate Steve Pisani.

While the first court had dismissed Jurgen Pisani’s explanation that he deleted the messages to conceal a planned celebration at a “gentleman’s club” from his wife as unbelievable, the Court of Appeal found that the explanation could not be so easily discarded.

The judge noted that the prosecution had failed to produce a digital forensic report to establish exactly when the communication was erased.

The accused was represented by Franco Debono, Edward Gatt, and Adreana Zammit.