Judge dismisses AG's appeal in parental sex abuse case

A judge has dismissed an appeal filed by the public prosecutor against the conviction of girl who had admitted to perjury, saying it could not fathom the reasons for which the appeal had been filed in the first place.

The decision marks another twist in the case of Leanne Camilleri, whose father Emanuel Camilleri had been sentenced to two years in prison for defiling his daughter, only to be released over a year later after his daughter pleaded guilty to perjury.

A constitutional court had released the man as an interim measure after the daughter, now in her twenties, had recanted her original version of events during the compilation of evidence against her father, after further medical examinations carried out on the girl revealed that she was still a virgin.

As a result of her admission, Leanne Camilleri had been sentenced to a three-year probation order and ordered to perform 100 hours of community service, as well as being placed under a general interdiction for ten years.

The girl’s mother, Lisa May Camilleri, is also undergoing perjury proceedings as she stands accused of instigating her daughter to falsely testify to being raped several times by her father. She was subsequently placed under a bill of indictment and remanded in custody.

Emmanuel Camilleri, who had spent over 400 days in prison as a result of the false allegations, subsequently filed constitutional proceedings against Police Inspector Louise Calleja, the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner, claiming his right to fair trial had been breached.

But the situation subsequently took a turn for the surreal, when the Attorney General then filed an appeal against Leanne Camilleri’s sentence, arguing that the girl’s admission was “manifestly unsafe and unsatisfactory.”

It argued that the admission of guilt did not satisfy the legal criteria, which state it must be clear, voluntary and unconditioned by external factors and that the sentence was, therefore, null.

“The court should have continued to hear evidence,” submitted the AG, “as it had good reason to,” going on to describe the situation as a textbook case of when an admission should not be accepted.

The girl was a “somewhat vulnerable person...susceptible to all types of psychological pressure,” argued the public prosecutor, pointing to the testimony of the victim’s brother, who had told the court of pressure to recant her version by means of promises of being given a mobile phone and money from her mother and grandparents.

It also pointed the finger of blame at the media, whose attention “might have put pressure on the accused and could easily have influenced her admission.”

However Leanne Camilleri’s lawyer, Maxilene Pace, had contested the appeal, arguing that the AG was, by law, not permitted to file an appeal against a finding of guilt, except against the punishment. The accused herself had not appealed, the lawyer pointed out, and described the AG’s version of the facts as “surreal and intended only to complicate the girl’s unfortunate circumstances.”

In his decision, judge Antonio Mizzi started by pointing out that the appeal had been filed almost a year after the promulgation of the contested sentence. According to law, the police, who had been conducting the prosecution, are meant to give the court written notice of their intention to appeal. No such notice was traced in the acts of the case, said the court.

But above all, the Court of Criminal Appeal observed that the court of first instance “had shown great caution” in its acceptance of the admission and upheld the decision that the admission had been made of the girl’s free will.

 “Frankly,” ended the judge, pointedly, “this court cannot understand the arguments made by the Attorney General. Any further comment is superfluous.”