Rabat attempted murder trial enters final stage

Madame Justice Edwina Grima has begun her summing up of the evidence and legal arguments brought before the jury trying former policeman Carmel Cutajar for the attempted murder of his wife.

The jury will retire to deliberate on its verdict after the judge concludes this exercise, which is expected to take up till around tomorrow afternoon.

This morning, prosecuting lawyer Giannella Busuttil, representing the office of the Attorney General told jurors that Cutajar was making two contradictory defences. On one hand, said the lawyer, he is arguing that the crime had been committed under the influence of sudden passion and mental excitement, whilst on the other hand he is saying that he chose to use the puny antique handgun instead of his lethal service weapon.

She urged the jury to ignore the backstory to the crime when dealing with the defence of the sudden passion.

He had not only handed himself over to the police, but had come up with a story that he and his wife had shot each other: “this indicates that the accused was lucid at the time and have intentionally done so.”

She reminded jurors that the accused was a policeman of 25 years' experience.

The defence was introducing doubt where there really was none, the prosecutor explained, appealing to the jury to remember that marital strife was the competence of the Family court.

“You must decide on a specific charge, that in 2012 when Carmelo Cutajar fired a shot at Maria Cutajar in the direction of her heart, he had the intention to place her life in manifest jeopardy. What he was thinking when he pulled the trigger.” The extramarital relationship was entirely immaterial to the charges at hand, contended the lawyer.

When the jury resumed in the afternoon, Lawyer Edward Gatt accused the Attorney General's office of trying to mislead the court. “I genuinely cannot understand ... she almost tried to justify perjury on the basis of embarrassment this morning.”

He pointed out that the defence was that of mental excitement or sudden passion.

“Was there provocation? I don't want to insult Mrs. Cutajar but I have to base myself on facts. You have a mother taking her lover to meet your children's headmistress! Is this not provocation?”

He roared down the prosecution's suggestion that the provocation was not that specified in the law.

“If you want to use legal theory, if you do not deliberate on the truths of life, what is the point of appointing a jury in the first place?”

He referred to a suggestion by the prosecution. “Had I ever said that the weapon was not functioning? They are introducing doubt where none exists because they know they have a weak case.”

It emerged from his statement to police that the accused had spoken at length - for around 30 minutes – of his suspicions, said Gatt, who said he drew comfort from the fact that a juror had noted, from her call records, the possibility of there being a second lover – Cikku.

“More than one! Ma titlifx ruhek int? Is there anyone, flesh and blood, who would not?

“When you join the police force and take the oath, irrespective of being sick or off, you are always getting a harsher punishment.”

He reminded jurors that Brigadier Maurice Calleja had testified that the weapon was far from ideal to use in a premeditated murder and pointed out that the accused was raised in an environment where weapons were available.

“Would a policeman who knew the punishment he would receive, who was familiar with weapons go to commit murder with an antique fit only to be mounted on a wall?”

The prosecution had emphasised the fact that the bullet lodged a mere 1.8millimetres from the woman's heart, Gatt said, noting that, after hearing the testimony of Dr. Jonathan Joslin, however they made no more mention of the necessity of an urgent medical intervention.

“Wherever you turn you will either find a lie or forensic evidence, which supports the defence's version of events.”

As soon as Maria Cutajar had testified, for the first time ever, that his children were being introduced to her lover, the lawyer observed, he had heard his client sobbing. “This man who has held firm for so many years. The time has come for his pain to end.”

“If you are deprived of your children's youth, it is lost forever. You have a person who, with great guile, is substituting your children's father figure. He invited the jurors to reflect on whether they would act reasonably if their children were taken from them in this way.

He repeated his assertion that homicidal intent was absent, saying that in spite of all his well-founded suspicion, Cutajar had still wanted to reconcile with his wife.

“Do justice by Carmenu. He bore a heavier burden than he should have. Today, whatever happens today, he has already lost the most precious thing to him. It has been taken from him.”

The accused could be seen to cover his face, quietly sobbing at those words.

“Now it is the time for these shenanigans to stop. You don't lie in court because you're ashamed. Wasn't she ashamed when she took his children? When she turned them against him?”

“I ask you in the name of justice, in the name of the Republic, do not make him carry more than he deserves.”