Court confirms jail term for policeman's murder

The Court of Criminal Appeal has confirmed a 22-year jail term handed down to former police constable Etienne Carter who was found guilty of the murder of his colleague, PC Mark Farrugia, in Tarxien five years ago.

The jail term reflected the fact that jurors had found Carter guilty of the crime on one hand and the fact that jurors had asked the first court to show mercy, on the other, Chief Justice Vincent DeGaetano, Mr Justice Joseph Filletti and Mr Justice David Scicluna, who presided over the appeal court, said.

On December 12, 2001, Carter was jailed for 22 years after jurors returned an 8-1 guilty verdict for the fatal shooting of PC Farrugia in Tarxien on March, 20, 1999. The wilful homicide charge was qualified with the fact that Carter was a police constable himself at the time and thus committed a crime he was in duty bound to prevent. Carter, 25, appealed claiming that his right to a fair hearing had been breached because jurors were prejudiced by the murder of PC Roger Debattista on December 12, 2001, just a few days before his trial started on November 19, 2001.

The jury, he said, was composed of citizens who, at the time, were still under shock from the constable's murder which they learnt about through the media. He had brought up this point at the Criminal Court before the trial began and the court decided to go ahead with the trial.

In a lengthy consideration of the matter the appeal court noted that the media had reported the events surrounding the murder and did not embark on any campaign that may have been prejudicial to Carter.

The court ruled that the first court's decision to go on with the trial was not irregular and was perfectly justified.

Carter also appealed on the grounds that the evidence could not have led to a guilty verdict since, among other things, his statement to the police showed he never intended to kill PC Farrugia. In the statement he said that men, who exercised control over him, had talked him into giving PC Farrugia a good beating.

After carefully examining the evidence provided during the trial the court ruled that jurors had legitimately reached their verdict.

In his appeal Carter also claimed that, in light of the circumstances of the case, the jail term was excessive. He made reference to reports compiled by a psychiatrist who said there existed problems of a certain weight.

The court noted that Carter was a constable and was therefore in duty bound to ensure that incidents of the sort did not happen.

The court also noted that the incident had ended in the death of a young, exemplary constable and therefore the court did not consider the jail term to be a harsh one.