A man who forged his brother’s signature on an official document has had his punishment reduced on appeal.
George Grech, 50, had been found guilty of forging a document to transfer an imported vehicle to a local dealer and an informal contract of sale related to the vehicle, which had been imported by his brother on his behalf.
Since Grech was not computer proficient, he had asked his brother to order the UK vehicle and have it shipped to Malta on his behalf.
Grech had subsequently engaged a local car dealer to sell the imported vehicle, transferring the car to that dealer before its resale so as to avoid paying daily administrative fines once the time-limit for its registration had expired.
The transfer was made directly from Grech’s brother to the dealer.
Trouble brewed, however, when some disagreement arose in respect of the payment due by the dealer.
Grech had instituted civil proceedings against the dealer.
It was at that point that the suspect forgery came to light, upon presentation of both private and official documents linked to the purchase and transfer of the vehicle.
The accused’s brother had testified that the signature on the transfer agreement was not his, thus prompting the Magistrates’ Court to order an investigation into the matter.
Both the accused and the dealer faced separate criminal action. A court-appointed handwriting expert concluded that the signature belonged to the accused and not his brother, the designated seller of the imported vehicle.
Grech was found guilty and landed a two-year jail term, suspended for three years. He filed an appeal against the conviction.
The Court of Criminal Appeal, presided over by Mr Justice Giovanni Grixti, observed that the first court had relied on the calligraphy expert’s report which, though indicative, was not definitive.
Yet that report, coupled with other evidence, proved that the accused had indeed falsified his brother’s signature.
However, the prosecution had failed to prove that the forgery had caused prejudice to the rights of others through “illicit gain,” a “necessary” element in respect of forgery of private writings.
For this reason, the court confirmed the conviction for forgery of the official document issued by the transport authorities, but cleared the appellant of forgery in the private writing relative to the sale, reducing the punishment to an 18-month jail term suspended for one year.
Lawyer David Gatt assisted Grech.