A man was cleared of sexually abusing his then 12-year-old daughter after a court concluded that the minor “retaliated” when disciplined over her excessive mobile use.

It began when the police received information from a social worker with the Foundation for Social Services who said the minor appeared to be sexually and physically abused by her father and physically abused by her mother.

The girl spoke about her alleged ordeal, spanning three years from the time that she was 12 years old.

She recounted her early years spent mostly with her maternal grandparents. The girl later moved abroad with her father where they spent years living with her paternal grandparents and returned to Malta in 2017.

Her father worked in construction but often got into trouble because of his drug problem.

The girl claimed that he would sometimes demand money from her mother and reacted violently when she denied the cash. He would then beat her mother and herself, the girl claimed.

The minor said that there were several occasions when her father would kiss her on the lips and touch her indecently. The alleged acts would take place in the bedroom while the door was shut.

She did not tell her mother about the abuse because there was little understanding between mother and daughter, she had said.

The girl mentioned how her father would get angry at her for using her mobile phone and would try to snatch it away from her.

The father was charged with committing sexual acts against the minor, defilement and causing her fear of violence.

He protested his innocence from the start.

Mother defended husband

The girl’s aunt, her mother, two doctors who examined the girl at health centres on different occasions as well as a child psychiatrist were among those who testified in the proceedings before the Magistrates’ Court.

The psychiatrist said that the girl’s mother defended her husband outright and became very agitated when told about her daughter’s allegations.

She expressed great surprise when told about the girl’s allegedly suicidal thoughts.

The accused also testified.

He explained that before being imprisoned in 2019, he was a construction worker.

His daughter went to a private school.

When he went home from work after 3pm, he would shower, have tea and have a nap before helping out with the housework.

He would go shopping and help prepare dinner.

All the while, his daughter was constantly attached to her mobile phone.

He denied beating her, explaining that since he was beaten as a child by his own father, he considered such acts to be “unacceptable.”

The man also testified that more recently, his wife had told him about some sexually explicit photos of their daughter which were allegedly sent to the mother by third parties.

He urged his wife to report the matter to the police. At this stage the man had been behind bars since 2019.

His wife also informed him that the girl was in a relationship with “a foreigner.”

The accused said that his wife knew about his drug problem. Before being imprisoned, he would seek treatment at the detox centre after work to overcome the addiction.

His wife testified a second time to inform the court that her daughter had recently told her that she wanted to marry a Sudanese man.

When she tried to dissuade her daughter by telling her that she was still too young, the girl warned that if her mother blocked her plans she [the daughter] would “keep the accused [her father] in jail.”

The mother also testified that a social worker had removed her daughter from the family home, placing her in a care home.

Inconsistent evidence

When delivering judgment the court observed that the prosecution’s case rested on the minor’s credibility as corroborated by other evidence.

The court stated at the outset that the girl was inconsistent in her version.

Although she described various episodes of abuse in great detail, she was “rather evasive” when questioned about her mobile use all throughout the day.

As revealed by her parents’ testimony, that was clearly a problem.

It was more credible that the girl was being disciplined for such excessive use of her phone and “retaliated” by escalating matters to create an inconvenience for her father, observed the court.

“It was very easy for the minor to make up a convincing story about her father since he was locked away in jail,” over separate charges, said Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit.

However, the man’s record sheet showed that he was never convicted of sexual offences.

It was also doubtful whether the alleged abuse could have gone unnoticed.

The family lived in a two-room residence consisting of a kitchen and a bedroom that was shared by the couple and their daughter. The family also watched television in that room.

The mother said that she was also in her husband’s company when he returned from work and besides, she could watch father and daughter through the bedroom door.

The court was “perplexed” by the fact that child protection agencies involved in the case offered no understanding of the family environment.

The court also could not understand why the investigating officers had not visited the home where the alleged abuse took place.

An inspector testified that although she obtained a search and arrest warrant, she arrested the father but did not search his home.

A search could have produced material evidence to corroborate the minor’s allegations and the inspector could have personally attested the size of the premises.

When all was considered the court observed that the allegations may have been triggered by the girl’s fear of her father leaving jail.

She might have taken “a calculated risk” to keep her father away, the court observed when acquitting the accused.

Lawyer Jason Grima was defence counsel.