Appeal’s Court overturns acquittal of two drivers who ran over pedestrian twice, causing his death

The Court of Criminal Appeal has overturned a lower court’s acquittal of two men, on charges relating to the involuntary homicide of a pedestrian in 2014.

The pedestrian, Philip Christopher Attard Scott from Għaxaq, had been walking along Triq Ħal Farruġ in Luqa at around 6:40am on the rainy January day in 2014 when he was knocked to the ground by an Opel Corsa driven by 30-year-old Warren Cassar.

A few minutes later, while Attard Scott was still sprawled on the ground, he was run over a second time, by a Ford Escort driven by 42-year-old James Micallef.

Attard Scott suffered severe head injuries as a result of the incident and died in hospital the next day. His post-mortem examination revealed that the victim had a high level of alcohol in his blood at the time of his death. The presence of cocaine and amphetamines was also detected in Attard Scott’s blood, albeit at lower levels.

Cassar and Micallef were later charged with having involuntarily caused Attard Scott’s death through negligence and reckless driving. Micallef was further accused of having left the scene of a road accident without providing his details.

In a decision handed down in May this year, Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit had acquitted the men of the charges relating to having negligently caused the pedestrian’s death and imposed a €50 fine on Micallef for fleeing the scene of the fatal incident.

The magistrate, having taken into account the fact that the road was unlit, together with the rainy conditions, ruled that “if anything, the negligence came from the victim’s side, who had been under the influence of drugs and alcohol and for some reason had been crossing a dark road in the early hours of the morning and in those atmospheric conditions that apart from putting his own life at risk, could have caused the injury or death of someone else.”

Besides this, it had not been established which of the two vehicles had inflicted the fatal head injury.

The Attorney General had immediately filed an appeal to this decision, arguing that the Court of Magistrates had not made a correct appreciation of the evidence and could not have legally reached the conclusion to acquit the accused of the charges.

 In a decision handed down by the Court of Criminal Appeal on Friday, Madame Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera noted that an expert appointed during the magisterial inquiry had concluded that the appellants had not been keeping a proper lookout at the time that the accident occurred.

Although they had not exceeded the speed limit, they had been imprudent in view of the prevailing weather conditions.

It was also noted that Cassar had admitted to having seen the victim moments before the impact.

Sometime after Cassar’s vehicle had struck the victim and came to a halt, Micallef had arrived and attempted to overtake as many as four stationary vehicles ahead of him and in so doing, running Attard Scott over for a second time.

Micallef had been stopped by onlookers who informed him that the victim was trapped under his car. The onlookers had then lifted the car and extracted the casualty from underneath it.

The court had heard witnesses testify that Micallef’s reaction to all this was to berate the onlookers for not having clearly marked out the previous collision, before driving off.

The judge ruled that the court of first instance had been incorrect to state that the evidence did not indicate which of the accused men had caused the victim’s death. It was clear from the medical and witness evidence, said the judge, that the fatal head injuries had been the result of the victim’s impact with the ground after being hit by Cassar’s vehicle.

The tyre marks on the victim’s jacket had then been caused by Micallef’s car, she added.

Scerri Herrera added that while it was true that there had been contributory negligence on the part of the pedestrian, it was also an established legal principle that this did not exonerate the driver unless it was the only cause of the incident, which was not the case here.

After reviewing the acts of the case, the judge found both men guilty of reckless driving but not dangerous driving.

“There is no doubt that both appellants were reckless in their driving. Warren Cassar by not keeping a proper lookout of the surrounding area and driving at a speed which was not ideal in the circumstances, so much so that he was unable to brake in time to avoid the incident. James Micallef also did not keep a proper lookout of his surroundings when he decided to perform an overtaking manoeuvre without taking into consideration what had happened ahead of him. In fact, he ended up driving onto the victim with his front wheel and did not realise that he had driven over a person.”

The judge sentenced Cassar to imprisonment for one year, suspended for two years. Micallef was fined €300 and ordered to bear the costs related to the appointment of court experts.

In addition, Cassar’s driving licence was suspended for three months, Micallef’s for one month.

Lawyer Arthur Azzopardi represented Micallef in the proceedings, while lawyer Alessia Zammit Mackeon appeared for Cassar.