Man accused of leading police on car chase has bail confirmed on appeal

The Criminal Court has refused to revoke the bail given to a young man, one of four accused of leading police on a car chase in a stolen Mercedes, arson and conspiracy to commit a crime, rejecting an appeal by the Attorney General.

Madame Justice Edwina Grima delivered the judgment this morning, in response to the appeal filed by the AG, who argued that Paul Farrugia’s bail should be revoked due to a risk of him tampering with evidence and the serious nature of the accusations against him, amongst others.

28-year-old Farrugia had been released on bail against a deposit of €1,000 and a personal guarantee of €10,000 after he was arraigned on January 30, together with Joel Falzon, 23, Danika Cilia, 22 and Sylvan Cilia, 20, accused of arson and conspiracy to commit a crime.

During their arraignment it was reported that they had been arrested on 28 January after the police were informed that a car had been set on fire in Mellieha.

The area had been surrounded and police were informed that a Mercedes was the getaway car. After leading the police on a large scale chase, in which the Mercedes escaped road blocks, the car was stopped

The three men were separately charged with the aggravated theft of a Mercedes. Falzon and Cilia were also accused of stealing a set of number plates and committing a crime whilst under a suspended sentence.

Joel Falzon was further charged with leading police on a car chase, driving recklessly and dangerously, damaging the stolen car and driving it with another car’s number plates and driving without insurance cover.

In reply to the AG’s appeal on the issue of bail, Farrugia’s lawyers, Joe Giglio and Roberto Montalto had pointed out that there was a magisterial inquiry underway which would have preserved all the evidence without any risk of contamination by the accused.

The Court of Appeal said that it had to examine whether the first court had exercised its discretion in a clearly erroneous manner, be it legally or factually before making any decision revoking bail. “This court says immediately that it sees no reason to depart from the opinion of the First Court…” said the judge. The conditions imposed on the accused offered the guarantees required by law, she added.

In addition, said the court, it would appear that the accused was obeying his bail conditions so far and there was no real risk of tampering with evidence as the accused had admitted the charges and therefore the only contestation in this case would be resolved by the reports of the experts in the magisterial inquiry and the testimony of police.