Man convicted of robbery, assault of former MP appeals jail term

Man handed a 12-year jail term over the robbery, assault of former MP appeals judgment arguing evidence exhibited during his trial by jury is unsatisfactory.

Kenneth Ellul, the man sentences to 12 years imprisonment over the robbery and assault on former Labour MP Professor Anthony Zammit, this morning filed an appeal challenging the guilty verdict. The robbery took place in 2008 at the victim’s home in Zebbug.

Ellul was found guilty by seven votes to two. He was convicted of holding Zammit against his will, aggravated theft and theft of a car, carrying an unlicensed weapon, assaulting the MP and causing him grievous injuries, and relapsing. Mr Justice Lawrence Quintano imprisoned Ellul for 12-years.

In his appeal, the convicted argued that neither the prosecution’s witnesses nor any of the court appointed experts linked him to the case. From the witness stand, Christopher Shepherd and Mark Anthony Ellul said that the accused had hinted at being involved in the robbery.

However, the Bench did not allow the defence to exhibit judgments showing how Mark Anthony Ellul had benefitted from two suspended jail terms and a probation order at the time he released a statement implicating the accused in the robbery.

Meanwhile, the testimony of Christopher Shepherd was peppered with inconsistencies. “This makes their testimony unsafe and unsatisfactory,” the appeal reads.

In filing the appeal, defence lawyer Josette Sultana explained that even the evidence tendered by the victim was unreliable. “Professor Zammit discredited the conclusions of all the court experts and changed his version of events multiple times.

“From the account taken a tempo vergine (immediately after the incident) to his version during the compilation of evidence and subsequently during his evidence at the jury, the victim added details in order to aid in the conviction of Kenneth Ellul”, the lawyer said.

Sultana also challenged the items exhibited as evidence in the case. “The shotgun and other items found in the stolen getaway vehicle have no connection with the convicted.

“Investigators had indeed arrested and investigated a number of suspects, but Kenneth Ellul was not one of them”, the lawyers said.

Furthermore witness Jason Galea, who testified about the revolver allegedly used in the robbery, claimed he did not know Ellul. Professor Zammit claimed the weapon was silver but the revolver exhibited at court was black.

“When the prosecution realised that neither the revolver could be linked to the convicted, the prosecutor told jurors that the weapon was similar to that used in the robbery, and not necessarily the same one”, Sultana argued.

Claiming irregularities in the procedures, Ellul called on the Court of Appeal to rule that he did not have a fair trial, the evidence was unsatisfactory and to acquit him of the charges. Should the Court of Appeal uphold the guilty judgment, the convicted requested the court hand down a more reasonable punishment.