A landlord found guilty of stealing electricity from a hair salon rented out to his tenants was given a suspended sentence in a case where the court criticised the “total neglect of duties” by the police.
Suspected foul play by Francis Vassallo, a 67-year-old Għaxaq resident, was first flagged by the woman who ran a hairdressing salon inside the premises undernearth the accused’s home.
Years ago, before the hairdresser and her husband had first rented the place, the room had been used as a garage where Vassallo kept his rabbits.
At the start of the lease, the couple paid the landlord some Lm2,300 for the installation of water and electricity, tile laying and paintwork to convert the garage into commercial premises.
When the couple moved in as lessees, the place was first used as a fishmonger’s shop but was later converted into a hair salon run by the lessee.
On March 9, 2020, the woman switched off and unplugged all appliances before closing shop shortly before the COVID-19 lockdown.
Suspicious electricity consumption
But when she returned to the premises some three weeks later to check that all was well, she immediately sensed something suspicious.
The flashing light on the mains switch caught her attention, prompting her to snap a photo of the reading on the electricity meter which indicated some consumption.
A second visit on April 6 returned a new reading, showing an increase in units, thus rousing the couple’s suspicions further.
Two visits on April 10 left no room for doubt.
Over a four-day span, the meter had registered an increase of 102.43 units of electricity.
The woman headed to the police station to file a report about the suspected electricity theft, only to be told that it was up to her to put forward evidence to prove the suspected theft.
So the following day, the couple called their electrician to inspect the shop meter and over the next few days the husband and the electrician set about tracing how the current was being siphoned away.
They cut open a channel through the shop wall and soon discovered a pipe leading out into the back shaft which was only accessible through the landlord’s garage at the back.
Armed with that fresh evidence, including a written statement by the electrician, the woman returned to the police station.
Three days later, on April 21, the police finally sought to make contact with Vassallo by posting a “letter to call”.
Two days later when the man arrived at the police station he was confronted with the allegations in his regard.
When interrogated on May 1, Vassallo chose to not answer any of the questions concerning the lease agreement and works carried out to install electricity inside the premises subsequently rented out to the victims.
Officers shifted responsibility to victim
Charges were issued against him in August, four months after the first report had been filed at the police station, prompting the court, presided over by Magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech, to remark that such attitude by the police defied “common sense and every form of good practice”.
The police current incident report itself showed that, rather than take immediate action or call for a magisterial inquiry when faced with the material evidence presented by the lessees, the officers had shifted responsibility onto the victim, telling her to prove the suspected theft.
Police later claimed to have acted upon advice given “by someone at Arms customer care”.
But the court was not impressed, pointing out that electricity theft was a crime and whatever any Arms representative may have said, the police had “an exclusive duty” to investigate suspected crime, especially when faced with a report by the victim.
Police had manifested “a total neglect of duties” when they did not even bother to visit the shop to confirm first-hand the lessees’ allegations.
By the time officers made contact with the landlord, the woman’s husband had personally confronted Vassallo, who shrugged off the allegations and challenged the couple to sue him in court.
Following that face-off, loud noises from the garage behind the shop appeared to indicate ongoing works possibly undertaken to cover up traces of the suspected crime.
By the time the case started in September and court experts were dispatched to inspect the premises, the wall on the accused’s side was all neatly plastered and painted over.
Yet a particular area appeared to indicate a more recent intervention.
When the wall was dug up, the experts came across three wires, their loose ends wrapped up in blue electric tape.
A roll of the same material was stored away on a raft inside the accused’s garage, the court was told.
Those wires led straight to the distribution box inside the salon.
A bulb was attached to the wires, the mains switch inside the shop was turned on and the bulb lit up, indicating that a current flowed into the garage that was used exclusively by the accused.
All evidence showed that the theft charge against the accused had been proved, said the court, casting aside his claims that the wires had previously been attached to an extractor to siphon out the stench when the place housed his rabbits.
The court handed down a 15-month jail term suspended for three years, pointing out that the total value of electricity used up by the accused and paid for by the lessees could not be sufficiently determined in terms of law.