A man found guilty of trafficking cannabis 11 years ago when heavily dependent on the drug, had his jail term suspended on appeal by a court convinced that he was now “completely reformed.”

Brian Barbara, 46, had been facing criminal proceedings since 2010 for possession and trafficking of cannabis resin after days of surveillance by the Drug Squad led to the discovery of two blocks of cannabis resin inside his vehicle, along with €150 in his trousers pockets.

Police had been keeping a close watch on Barbara for months, ever since his name had been dropped by a youth who was caught smoking a cannabis joint inside his car, parked close by to an Għaxaq playground. 

That youth, Bjorn Dalli, first told police that he used to ‘buy’ his supply of cannabis from a guy called “Brian” whom he would call and subsequently meet, generally at the Għaxaq bypass every two or three weeks. 

Dalli confirmed that version before the inquiring magistrate, stating that for some seven months he got €25 or €70 worth of cannabis from the man whom he identified in a photo shown by the police. 

Yet when summoned to testify at the criminal proceedings against Barbara years later, Dalli’s version changed. 

The witness contradicted himself saying that “he had never said that [Brian] was a dealer,” but simply someone who favoured him by supplying the drug. 

Under cross-examination, he even denied knowing the accused or ever ‘buying’ drugs from him. 

Barbara was eventually found guilty by a Magistrates’ Court in 2019 and was condemned to an effective jail term of nine months and a €1,500 fine. 

His lawyers appealed the conviction arguing that the first court had relied solely on the sworn testimony of the prosecution’s main witness, “completely discarding” other evidence, including the accused’s own testimony that had been consistent throughout.

Barbara had explained how at the time of the alleged incident he used to smoke some 10 joints daily, sometimes even popping out to his car for a smoke during work hours. 

He explained that the two blocks of cannabis resin found in his vehicle were his weekly supply which he used to buy from a guy from Qormi. 

On the day of arrest, he was on his way to the dentist when police approached his vehicle outside his home.

That was why he was carrying some €150, the man explained.

The drug was later analysed by a court-appointed scientific expert who certified that it consisted of 18.5 grams of cannabis resin of six per cent purity. 

Barbara went on to claim that Dalli had once spoken to him outside the courtroom so as to apologise for having testified against him, saying that police had “forced” him to do so.

Dalli himself had benefited from a reduction in punishment and was placed under probation after being prosecuted. 

Court proceedings a source of anxiety 

The punishment handed down to Barbara was excessive, argued his lawyers Franco Debono and Marion Camilleri, pointing out further that the appellant had since got his life back on track, had a stable job, a family and had quit his drug habit. 

A doctor also confirmed that improvement, reporting a “satisfactory level of stability.”

Court proceedings were a source of great anxiety causing the appellant to fear that the outcome of the case might negatively impact his employment, said the doctor, suggesting that professional guidance and support would be highly beneficial.

The case was referred to the Drug Offenders Rehabilitation Board which in June pronounced itself satisfied of Barbara’s rehabilitation process.

In light of such considerations the Court of Criminal Appeal, presided over by Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera, declared that the appellant was a “completely reformed man” who had reintegrated himself within society.

Although the punishment handed down in 2019 was well within the legal parameters applicable at the time, given the circumstances the appellant deserved to be spared an effective jail term.

While acknowledging that the main witness had indeed given conflicting versions, his testimony in court years later and in the presence of the accused, could not be given more weight than his original statement shortly after his arrest.

His earlier version was more credible, concluded the judge, whilst ordering a copy of the judgment to be forwarded to the Police Commissioner for further investigations against Dalli over his court testimony.

As for the appellant, the court confirmed his conviction but varied the nine-month jail term by suspending it for two years and reducing the fine to €1,000.