A man has been cleared in a trial by jury of attempted murder following a violent scuffle with a fellow hunter whom he blamed for the final shooting.

After five hours of deliberation, the jurors returned a 'not guilty' verdict of eight votes against one on the ground of attempted murder. 

The accused, Joseph Scicluna, and members of his family were in tears when the jurors returned their verdict. 

He was found guilty of having acted in excess of legitimate self defence through fear or fright.

After the verdict was delivered a technical issue arose about the sentence. The matter is to be tackled on Sunday. 

As for the other two grounds concerning the possession of a weapon during the alleged crime and possessing a firearm without the police permit, the jury pronounced him not guilty. 

Scicluna insisted, when testifying at the trial on Thursday, that he managed to grab Mark Farrugia’s hunting shotgun just as the other man made a beeline for it after the weapon fell from the victim’s grip during the scuffle. 

Farrugia, who testified on Wednesday, insisted the accused had suddenly hit him with a thick wooden rod as the pair chatted about birds and the weather in the very early hours of that October 31 morning in 2018. 

A scuffle ensued on the sloping surface of the field in the area of ‘Ta’ Dnat’ at San Gakbu, Dingli shortly after 5.30am. 

When testifying for the first time at the trial by jury, Scicluna gave a very different version of the incident. 

He claimed that Farrugia had burst into a verbal attack, swearing and insulting him when he calmly told him not to shoot low when hunting to avoid damaging Scicluna’s drip irrigation pipes. 

Scicluna also claimed that he had reserved a quiet word of warning for Farrugia, telling him “leave my son in peace. He has enough problems.” 

That quiet warning had triggered Farrugia’s violent outburst and the physical clash that followed, insisted the accused. 

He said he hit Farrugia with the thick rod because the younger man grabbed him first. 

He pushed Farrugia away after allegedly being punched three times on the eyes and while still dazed by the blows, he saw the alleged victim sprint “with all his might” towards the firearm on the ground. 

“I’m done. He’s going to shoot me,” Scicluna said he thought in that brief moment before he managed to grab the shotgun first and fired a shot. 

However, his alleged victim denied that version, insisting under cross examination that the two hunters had “never, never” spoken about Scicluna’s son.

 While chatting about the weather and the gallina, Scicluna had pointed out something in a nearby almond tree.

When Farrugia turned to look in that direction, Scicluna had dealt him a blow on the head with the marlogg, the thick handle of the accused’s hoe. 

The victim suffered grievous injuries after being shot with his own hunting weapon and was subsequently admitted to Mater Dei Hospital in critical condition. His aggressor was accused of attempted murder, grievous bodily harm, possession of a firearm during the commission of the crime and possessing a weapon without the relative police permit. 

He protested his innocence throughout the proceedings. 

The prosecution pointed out that the accused had originally denied being at the crime scene that day. He had even blamed his cat and an accidental brush with a lemon tree for his visible injuries. 

However, when testifying at the trial, Scicluna explained that since he had never been through a similar experience, he was “scared” and “traumatized” when summoned by the Rabat police. 

Scicluna claimed that he only gave the true version when he engaged his present lawyer and insisted that what he told the jurors was “the truth.” 

Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera presided over the trial. AG lawyers Kevin Valletta and Kaylie Bonnet prosecuted.

Lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Jacob Magri were defence counsel. Lawyers Edward Gatt and Shaun Zammit appeared parte civile.