Maksar gang trial: Jamie Vella laughed during police interrogation

Session's over

That's it for today. The court will reconvene tomorrow with Psaila delivering more arguments in favour of his client. Thanks for following with us.

Murder middleman never knew or met Jamie Vella

Psaila talks again about Melvin Theuma. He says Theuma testified for around three days straight. Despite this, he answered every question put to him and his testimony is backed by recordings and screenshots. 

“Not only did Theuma answer calmly and consistently to every question asked by the defence, but what the prosecution coincidentally forgot to mention is that Theuma said he doesn’t know Jamie Vellla and never even met him,” Psaila says.

FBI data contradicts Vince Muscat's testimony

He now refers to Muscat’s testimony concerning the night before Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder. He had testified under oath that the bomb was retrieved from a garage in Santa Venera. However, the FBI  found that Muscat’s burner phone used for the murder was never seen in Santa Venera the night before the murder. 

Lawyer compares Vince Muscat to pardoned middleman

Psaila is turning to Vince Muscat’s testimony. According to Psaila, Muscat responded with “I don’t know” about 200 times during cross-examination. “Does this answer give you peace of mind on those questions?” he asks the jurors. 

He says that Muscat had told the court under oath that he never held a weapon. However, 12 hours later he said he chooses not to comment. “Is this the truth?”

Psaila compares this to Melvin Theuma’s testimony. Theuma, who was also granted a presidential pardon, was more lucid in his testimony. 

Bomb victims refused to speak to police about attacks

Psaila is comparing the investigations into the two homicides. Despite several bomb attacks in the years before Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder, no foreign experts were brought in to investigate them. 

He’s now referring to a report written by Brigadier Jeffrey Curmi about the bomb attacks. In this report, Curmi identified a pattern among the attacks, suggesting there could be a common denominator between them.

The specific attacks mentioned by Curmi were the three separate attacks that killed Daphne Caruana Galizia, injured Romeo Bone and targeted Kevin Ellul. 

Psaila points out that Bone and Ellul survived the explosions but refused to speak to police about the attacks.

Sitting resumes

The court is back in session. 

Court on break

The court is taking a half-hour break. We will be back when the sitting resumes.

A checklist for jurors

Psaila is bringing up the ‘checklist for jurors’ that the prosecution referred to in its replika. They had told jurors to base their decision on a series of questions.

“This checklist should have been used by the police in February 2021 before arresting these four men and before giving Vince Muscat a presidential pardon,” he says.

‘All of Europe stopped to follow this case’

Psaila says that, at its peak, all of Europe stopped to follow this case. Years later, the prosecution is making these arguments despite bringing in the FBI and foreign experts on the case. 

“Is this how justice should be served? Don’t you think that certain questions deserve an answer at this stage of the proceedings?”

Psaila mentions Vince Muscat’s pardon. “This isn’t just a photo or document or CD. This document is signed by the president on behalf of the Republic of Malta upon recommendation of the cabinet after taking advice from the attorney general and police,” he says. 

Jamie Vella laughed during interrogation

Psaila tells jurors that the inquiry into the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia is still open. He recalls what Police Commissioner Angelo Gafa told journalists during a press conference in 2021 about the arrests connected to this case. One journalist had asked whether any politicians were mentioned by Muscat during interrogation, but the commissioner said there was no proof. 

He brings up the right to disclosure, which refers to information on what led to the arrest warrant.

He says that Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud, the chief investigator on the case, had judged Vella for laughing during interrogation. “He wasn’t laughing because murder is funny but because the case did not make sense to him,” he says

Prosecutors spent too much time on untrustworthy witness, lawyer says 

It's lawyer Ishmael Psaila's turn to convince jurors that his client is not guilty of the charges brought against him. He is defending Jamie Vella, who is accused of murdering Carmel Chircop and supplying the bomb that killed Daphne Caruana Galizia.

“I’m going to be hard on the prosecution, but it’s not personal,” he tells the jurors.

He starts by saying he's surprised that the prosecutor on the case has spent so much time trying to convince jurors to believe Vince Muscat, who is ultimately their star witness. 

Back in session

The sitting has resumed, but one of the jurors has been dismissed from the trial due to health reasons and is being replaced by one of the reserve jurors. 

Break till 2:30pm

The court is taking a two-hour break. We will be back with our reporting when the proceedings resume.

Base your decision on the facts, lawyer tells jurors

Cuschieri is closing his argument. He tells jurors that their decision must be serene and pure. “Your decision should be backed in some way or another by scientific fact. You cannot base your decision on a person that, to save his own skin, is ready to ruin his friends’s lives.”

Lawyer tells jurors to make decision with complete peace of mind

“You could be guilty of plenty of things, but not guilty of the one thing you’re being accused of,” Cuschieri says. 

The lawyer says he has met many people who he believes served prison time for a crime they did not do. He tells the jurors that they should make their decision with complete peace of mind that it was the correct decision to take.

Right to silence does not imply guilt, lawyer says

Cuschieri is insisting to jurors that invoking one’s right to silence cannot be used to imply guilt. “Let’s say you skived work for an hour one day. When you come back, you learn that a handbag was stolen from the office. Police start investigating everyone and they come to question you. Because you were skiving work, you choose not to answer.”

He argues that assuming guilt from this right to silence would result in an injustice. 

Lawyer says crucial part of Muscat’s testimony is false

The court is back in session. Cuschieri says the evidence instead suggests that Chircop was not shot at by a person from inside a car but rather by someone standing up. “If we are to conclude that Chircop was not shot at from a person inside a car, the next logical conclusion is that a substantial, crucial part of Muscat’s testimony is false.”

Session on break

The court is taking a short break. We will be back with our reporting at around 11:30am.

Conflicting evidence on gunshot wounds

Cuschieri is now referring to a statement from the prosecuting team that forensic reports indicated that the shots were fired at Carmel Chircop by a person sat in a car. 

However, Cuschieri makes a distinction between what reports show and what the court-appointed experts concluded. 

This statement from the prosecution stems from a report written by Mario Scerri, a reknowned forensic doctor. The report included an exposition on the entry and exit wounds on Chircop's body but did not specify that the bullets were shot upwards from a low angle. “It’s the Attorney General that came to this conclusion, not the experts,” he says.

Scerri already testified in court about this report, showing jurors and the rest of the courtroom some gruesome photos of the autopsy process. Cuschieri accuses the prosecution of using this shock factor to leave an impression on the jurors.

Lawyer says Muscat’s testimony poorly corroborated by police

Cuschieri is going through Muscat’s testimony and listing moments of “poor corroboration”. For example, police said  the fact that they found one of four garage door panels opened at the crime scene corroborates what Muscat said, that Chircop only managed to open one door panel before he was killed.

Another piece of information that police said corroborates Muscat’s testimony is that Chircop’s wife told police that Chircop used to spend a lot of time at a cafeteria in Naxxar, and that the two of them dined at a Birgu restaurant before the murder. Muscat mentioned both these things in his testimony. 

Cuschieri shuts this down entirely. He says many knew that Chircop enjoyed going to this particular cafeteria in Naxxar, which was very popular anyways. Meanwhile, Muscat’s testimony on the Birgu waterfront is hazy too. According to Cuschieri, the restaurant never had tables on the ground floor by the seafront, which is what Muscat had said in court.

Credible witnesses don't need corroboration, lawyer says

Cuschieri explains to jurors what it means to corroborate information. “If I say the sun is out, that’s just what I’m saying. If another person who doesn’t know me says it’s sunny outside, then that corroborates what I said. I can also use my mobile to take a photo and show you that the sun is out.” he says.

He points out that, at law, a witness's testimony does not need to be corroborated if that witness is credible. 

He insists on the credibility. The defence team's strategy this whole time has been to attack Muscat's credibility as a witness.

Lawyer says Muscat lied about AK47 in car during Chircop murder

Cuschieri says Muscat only mentioned an AK47 in connection to the Chircop murder after testifying in the magisterial inquiry in 2021. The magistrate had specifically asked about the weapons, finding it hard to believe that the three men (Vince Muscat, George Degiorgio and Jamie Vella) only had two guns on them at the time of the murder.

At first, Muscat said it was just a revolver and pistol. It was only after this interaction that he mentioned an AK47 kept in the back seat of the car in case things go awry. 

“Muscat, an expert in lies and manipulation, felt that he had to change his version of events to make things more believable.”

‘A beautiful lie’: Muscat could not remember if Robert Abela was his lawyer

Cuschieri is telling jurors about what he believes is the best lie to have come out of this trial. 

During cross-examination, the defence lawyer Amadeus Cachia asked Muscat to confirm that Robert Abela, who is now the prime minister, was hired as his lawyer in the past. To this, Muscat replied that he does not remember.

“How many lawyers have become prime ministers in recent years? Wouldn’t you be proud if your lawyer become a magistrate, a minister, a prime minister?”

Cuschieri says “I don’t remember” is not a neutral statement, like “I choose not to comment”. “That’s a statement in itself. That means your memory isn’t serving. 

‘Investigators found refuge in Vince Muscat’

Cuschieri is telling jurors that Vince Muscat’s testimony allowed investigators to come out as heroes on the case, despite Muscat’s poor reputation.

“Investigators found refuge in a man who is ready to do everything to save his skin. If he must spend a year in prison, he will do anything to not serve that sentence or settle for six months instead of a year,” he said. 

“If the investigators did their job, there wouldn’t be any need to rely on him. They needed him, almost idolising him,” he said. 

Good morning and welcome to today's live blog. You can follow updates here on the trial by jury of four men accused of murdering Daphne Caruana Galizia and Carmel Chircop.

Right now, lawyer Leslie Cuschieri is making arguments to the jurors in favour of his client, George Degiorgio. He has already pleaded guilty to carrying out the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. In this case, he is being charged with carrying out the hit on Carmel Chircop.