Cleared of threatening his estranged wife

A man was yesterday cleared of threatening his estranged wife after an appeal court ruled that the place and time recorded in the charge did not coincide with the place and time reported by the wife.

Angelo Muscat was originally fined Lm25 for threatening his estranged wife Rita, in Mgarr Road, Mgarr, on May 7 at about 6 a.m. The Magistrates' Court also bound him not to molest her for a year against a penalty of Lm100 in default.

He appealed, claiming that he could not be found guilty of the crime since he had been in a field with his brother and father at 6 a.m.

Chief Justice Vincent De Gaetano upheld his appeal after hearing Muscat's wife testify that her husband threatened her at 6 p.m. and not 6 a.m. and that the name of the road was St Paul's Street and not Mgarr Road.

He noted that although it might seem like a simple technicality, the charge brought against Muscat had not been proven.

The chief justice added that the facts under which a person was found guilty or not guilty were very important and in this case there was a considerable difference in the time and the place was totally different.

In another appeal judgment, Muscat was fined Lm50 for filing a frivolous and vexatious appeal.

The Magistrates' Court had fined Muscat Lm25 for failing to abide by a ruling of the Second Hall of the Civil Court handed down on July 31, 2001, and establishing alimony at Lm60 a week.

The police claimed, on December 31, 2001, that he had never paid his wife.

Muscat explained that he had not paid his share because his wife had taken Lm3,000 from their community of acquests "abusively".

But Chief Justice DeGaetano ruled that it was wrong of Muscat to ignore the ruling. He could always have tried to contest it or request alterations in the appropriate fora.

He also added that even if Muscat's allegations about his wife's appropriation of the Lm3,000 were true, the appeal court could not do anything about the matter since it did not fall within its competence.