A man charged with assaulting a barman who claimed to have ended up bruised and sore for a month has been cleared of all criminal liability while his alleged victim faces the prospect of being prosecuted for taking a false oath. 

Mohamad Altuoma was charged during a Qawra district sitting over the incident, which had taken place in the very early hours of February 7 at a bar in Triq l-Imrejkba, St Paul’s Bay. 

Neil Bugeja, who ran the commercial establishment at the time, claimed to have been attacked by the accused who had turned up with his cousin, insisting on being served in spite of being told that the bar was closed.

A couple of days before the incident, the same man had been turned away by the barman when he came along with a group of friends. 

The party of friends would stir up trouble, the bar owner subsequently testified.

On the day of the incident, the accused and his cousin had allegedly attacked him and a friend of his who happened to be present at the time.

The onslaught had left him badly bruised, the alleged victim testified, describing how “all his ribs were purple and he was in pain.”

The accused also chose to testify in the proceedings, giving a very different version.

When he asked for a drink at the bar that night, Bugeja had allegedly turned him away, punching him in the face. 

As he fell down, the alleged victim grabbed a chair and beat him with it. 

After the incident, Altuoma headed straight to the Floriana health centre from where he was directed to Mater Dei Hospital where he underwent ultrasound tests.

When discharged a few days later, he filed a police report, denying that he was drunk at the time of the incident or that he had attacked the barman. 

On the other hand, under cross-examination, the alleged victim denied having punched the accused in the face and kicking him in the stomach. 

Bugeja said that when Altuoma threw a stool in his direction, he had simply flung it back at him. 

Alleged victim presented no evidence, X-Rays, CCTV footage

Considering the entire framework of facts and the parties’ conflicting accounts, the court deemed the accused’s version more credible. 

If the alleged victim had truly been hit on the chest with a stool, why had he waited three days to see a doctor, asked the court. Bugeja had gone to a health centre only after being approached by police.

A doctor certified that although the alleged victim bore no visible signs of injury, he was in pain when touched and “tender over the left sixth rib”.

Contrary to what he had claimed about being bruised and barely being able to move for a month or so, Bugeja produced no evidence of such bruising, nor any X-ray results.

Nor did he preserve CCTV footage from the night, saying it was cancelled after 48 hours. 

If the barman had truly been attacked, then he had the best evidence in hand. However, he chose not to preserve it, observed Magistrate Charmaine Galea.

When all was considered, the court concluded that Altuoma had likely not left the bar when told to do so, but believed that it was Bugeja who had attacked him and not the other way around. 

That meant that the alleged victim had taken a false oath and consequently, the court ordered that the judgment was to be communicated to the Police Commissioner for any opportune action accordingly. 

The accused was cleared of all criminal liability. 

Inspector Warren Galea prosecuted. Lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Jacob Magri were defence counsel.