Minivan driver acquitted of defiling 6-year-old, driving without a license

A minivan driver was acquitted of defiling a minor after a court deemed his version more credible than that of the alleged victim.

The driver, an Indian national who cannot be named by court order, was arraigned in June 2023 and accused of performing non-consensual sexual acts on a six-year-old boy. He was also accused of driving without a valid licence. The man denied the charges.

Upon arraignment, he had been remanded in custody for some six weeks. 

The alleged victim testified in the proceedings, saying he used to take school transport before the incident, and nowadays, his mother drives him to school.

He said he would sit anywhere in the van, but mostly at the front between the accused and another van driver. The accused was the previous driver of the minivan but was replaced as soon as his licence was about to expire. He accompanied the new driver and taught him the route.

According to the child, the accused “annoyed him” as he would touch his head and touch his private parts. In his testimony, the six-year-old said that the new driver did not see the accused touching him. The child also said he had told the accused to stop and that he got angry at him after telling his father.

The child said he was placed at the front of the minivan after getting into a physical fight with a child who was a year older than him over Pokémon cards.

He insisted it was the accused who made him sit at the front, and alleged that he was “angry” about the incident while the accused was “happy”.

During cross-examination, the child said the school headmistress instructed the driver to make him sit at the front after he fought with another child on sports day.

He also mentioned another friend who had pulled down his pants and exposed himself in front of other children. The victim alleged that this other friend had “forced” him to expose himself.

The alleged victim testified he would sometimes wear a seatbelt and at other times, he would not. The boy said his parents were informed that he had to sit at the front, since it was evident that he was involved in school fights.

Police inspector Eman Hayman testified that the boy’s father had gone to the  Msida police station and reported the alleged incident in which the driver allegedly touched his son. The inspector said the father had picked up the boy on the day and noticed him behaving “strangely”. The boy then told his father the driver had touched him indecently.

The boy’s father also testified, telling the court he lived abroad and would return to Malta every now and then.

On the day, he went to the school to pick up the child and met the accused, saying he shook hands with the latter. The accused and the witness spoke about the boy’s misbehaviour and the reason why he had to be seated at the front of the minivan.

The man testified that after he picked up his son on that day, he took him to grab something to eat, with the child claiming that the driver would touch him and bend his Pokémon cards. The man took him to the police station to file a report.

During cross-examination, the man claimed he had a “unique and special” relationship with his son, which is why the minor never told his mother.

His mother confirmed that the boy never opened up about the incident, and it was her ex-husband who informed her when they went to file the report.

The woman also told the court that the driver reported the boy’s misbehaviour several times, and for this reason, he was made to sit at the front in between the two men.

The assistant headmistress testified, saying the school transport system had nothing to do with the school and it was a system used by the parents.

The witness said she got to know about the incident from the boy’s parents, and the company operating the transport is responsible for what happens in the van.

'No complaints about driver'

The witness said that between the period of December 2023 and Easter 2023, there were two drivers: one driving and another sitting at the front. She also testified that there were no complaints about the driver, however, there were several complaints about the children using school transport since they were not supervised.

During cross-examination, the woman confirmed that a driver had complained about the alleged victim’s misbehaviour on school transport.

She also confirmed that the boy was made to sit at the front on her recommendation and the parents'.

'Foul language and offensive gestures'

The accused, who travelled to Malta to work as a driver during the pandemic, testified he had graduated in finance and held an MBA.

He would send 80% of his income to his family back home. He had been in a stable relationship with a woman for the past 10 years and wanted to establish himself in Malta and get married.

The man recalled how he got his job and that his employer had taught him the route.

When his employer was driving, the children complied; however, when he was at the wheel, the children would rarely listen to him. There was no supervision on the minivan, with children frequently arguing and getting into fights.

He described the victim as the naughtiest of the lot, adding that several times he would have to stop the van for the children to calm down.

The driver testified that he was verbally abused by the six-year-old who would often use foul language and offensive gestures.

The accused reported the child several times to his grandmother and parents.

He recalled that once, the child’s mother informed him he would be picked up by his father.

This was the day after the alleged victim fought with another child.

It was decided that the other child would be made to sit at the front on the way to school while the alleged victim was made to sit at the front in the afternoon.

He recalled that the alleged victim's father was angry at him when he informed him about the fight, feeling that his son had more injuries than the other boy.

In his testimony, the accused said the boy’s father probably did not view him well since he was Indian and practised Hinduism, adding the boy’s maternal grandmother had asked several personal questions.

After the sports day incident, the headmistress told the driver that the victim should always sit at the front. The boy’s mother had also suggested this, and this was corroborated by messages over WhatsApp.

The driver also testified that the child did not enjoy wearing a seatbelt and would throw his Pokémon cards at the children sitting behind him, with the children going crazy to collect them.

The driver also had recordings of the child using offensive language against him and other children.

He recalled how the company had employed another driver as soon as the accused’s licence was about to expire.

The accused was teaching the new driver the routes.

'Alleged victim threw underwear at new driver'

He testified that one time, the alleged victim threw his underwear at the new driver. He also insisted he never touched the child indecently, saying that where he is from, they viewed the elderly and children as “gods or angels” and “would never do something like this”.

The new driver also took the witness stand.

He arrived in Malta in February 2023 and started working as a trainee in April 2023.

The accused taught him the routes, and he confirmed that he had been driving. The man said the accused sat next to him while the children were at the back.

He also testified that the alleged victim was made to sit at the front by the teachers and his parents since he was frequently involved in fights with other children.

The man also testified that the boy used offensive language and gestures.

The man’s employer testified that the accused was still working for him but avoided any work involving minors due to the alleged incident. He said he never received any complaints about him.

A recruiter within the same company said he received complaints about the accused when he was late due to traffic jams, but this was out of his control.

Moreover, the drivers complained about the children’s behaviour on school transport, since they frequently fought while being transported and would spit at each other.

The witness said the alleged victim was always seeking trouble and fighting with other school children.

He added that parents of other children were frequently angry with the accused since their children had injuries caused by their peers.

In its considerations, the court observed that the case rested on the minor’s version of events against that of the accused.

It observed that the child was very intelligent despite his young age. However, he had already been exposed to offensive gestures and language.

This clearly emerged from his behaviour with other children, the court held, as it placed the boy’s behaviour in context.

'Minor made man’s life a living hell'

The court held that the accused’s version of events was consistent and credible, and shed light on the minor’s character. Moreover, the police found nothing on his phone which could have been incriminating.

The boy contradicted himself during the testimony, the court observed, underlining that the minor eventually admitted to being involved in several fights on the school van.

The accused maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings and also provided the court with a detailed version of events, the court observed, adding that the man highlighted the disciplinary issues he had been facing and from his testimony, it emerged that the minor made the man’s life "a living hell".

The court also underlined there was a problem with school transport, with the assistant headmistress testifying that “children are children” and would receive daily complaints about their behaviour, but in reality, there was no supervision.

This was deemed a “gross” shortcoming from the school in question, with the court underlining that the driver was responsible for driving the children in a “safe and responsible manner”.

It also deemed the school’s explanation on the lack of supervision as “unacceptable”, saying that there should be an adult responsible for supervising the students and disciplining them accordingly.

The court suggested that this role could also be taken up by elderly individuals who wanted to be engaged and volunteer in the community.

The court said during the proceedings it clearly emerged that the child was problematic at school and on the school transport, and all of these factors contributed to him making up this story.

From the evidence, it also emerged it was not true that the accused had been driving without a valid driving licence.

The court acquitted the man of all charges and ordered that a copy of the judgment be sent to the Commissioner for Children, the children's rights minister and the Secretariat for Catholic Education.

AG lawyer Danika Vella prosecuted together with police inspectors Dorianne Tabone and Eman Hayman.

Lawyers Jason Azzopardi, Alessandro Farrugia and Kris Busietta assisted the accused.

Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit presided over the court.