Man fined €1,000 over offensive messages sent to ex-partner

A man has been fined €1,000 and handed a three-year restraining order after a court found him guilty of misusing electronic communications by sending a string of offensive messages to his former partner.

The 43-year-old man was found guilty on Monday over messages sent to his former partner. The court, however, acquitted the accused of a separate charge of insulting or threatening his partner after finding that the charge had become time-barred.

The court heard that the victim had received a number of messages from a mobile number which she identified as belonging to her ex-partner.

She told the court she was certain of the number because the pair had chosen almost identical mobile numbers while they were still in a relationship. The numbers differed only in their first digit.

The victim had printed the messages and sent them to the investigating police officers by email. The court described their contents as offensive and insulting, adding that they were of such an obscene nature that it chose not to reproduce them in writing.

The defence argued that the prosecution had failed to prove that the accused had sent the messages because a representative of telecommunications company Epic had not been called to testify.

The court rejected this argument, holding that the identity of the person sending a message could be established through other convincing evidence and did not necessarily require testimony from the service provider.

It found the victim’s testimony consistent and said it was convinced that her version of events was truthful. Together with the screenshots presented in evidence, this was sufficient to prove the misuse of electronic communications beyond reasonable doubt.

Accused's statements discarded over legal-assistance breach

The court also excluded statements the accused had made to police during their investigation after identifying a procedural failure concerning his waiver of the right to legal assistance.

Under the Criminal Code, when a detained person chooses not to seek legal assistance, that decision must be recorded in writing in the presence of two witnesses.

The document presented in the proceedings contained the signature of the investigating officer and that of only one other police officer, meaning that the required second witness's signature was missing.

The magistrate noted that the court could not be satisfied that the man’s spontaneous and incriminating statement to police had been made without compromising his right to a fair hearing.

It consequently disregarded everything the accused had told police during the investigation when determining whether he was guilty.

First charge time-barred

The man had also been charged with insulting or threatening his former partner.

However, the court found that the contravention was subject to a three-month limitation period. The alleged offence took place on 1 May 2024, while the accused was positively notified of the proceedings on 30 January 2025, more than eight months later.

The court therefore declared the first charge time-barred and acquitted him of it.

The accused was nevertheless found guilty of the electronic communications offence and fined €1,000.

The court also issued a three-year restraining order in favour of the victim.

The court warned the man that breaching any prohibition or restriction contained in the order would itself constitute an offence, punishable by a fine of up to €7,000, imprisonment for up to two years, or both.

Inspector Joanna Piscopo prosecuted.

Magistrate Nadia H. Vella presided over the court.