Prosecutor defends credibility of Vince Muscat in Caruana Galizia murder trial

State witness Vince Muscat’s testimony was consistent, prosecutor Anthony Vella told a panel of jurors after the lawyers of the four men accused of their roles in the murders of Carmel Chircop and Daphne Caruana Galizia questioned Muscat’s credibility.

Addressing claims by the defence that Muscat is a liar, Vella asked them to reflect: “Had he been a liar, would there be evidence which substantiates his statements?”

“Muscat’s testimony has been consistent throughout. The substance of what he has been saying remained the same throughout,” Vella said.

The trial by jury of four men accused of their roles in the murders of lawyer Carmel Chircop and journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia resumed on Thursday afternoon.

Robert Agius, known as Ta’ Maksar, and his associate Jamie Vella are accused of supplying the bomb that killed Caruana Galizia.

They are further accused, along with Adrian Agius and George Degiorgio, of murdering lawyer Carmel Chircop two years earlier. All four are pleading not guilty.

The last two witnesses – former minister Chris Cardona and lawyer Arthur Azzopardi – summoned by defence lawyers assisting Jamie Vella, testified in the morning session.

In earlier sessions, the defence had questioned the credibility of Muscat, the state’s star witness in proceedings.

Lawyer Alfred Abela argued that the other state witness, Melvin Theuma, was more credible and, therefore, his testimony should be given more weight.

But prosecutor Vella argued against those claims on Thursday.

Describing Muscat as a “crucial” witness for the prosecution, he explained that the defence attacked the key witness for not remembering details. But one needs to keep in mind that he is recounting facts that happened over a period of months and years.

The prosecutor highlighted how Muscat led them to state witness Melvin Theuma. While Muscat had no contact with alleged mastermind Yorgen Fenech and never spoke about the murder with Theuma, the convicted hitman knew about Theuma from what Alfred Degiorgio – who admitted his role as a hitman – told him. However, that information alone was not sufficient to take legal action.

He also explained that Muscat had negotiated a plea deal in the Caruana Galizia case and was given a reduced sentence. While the court has the discretion to uphold the agreement or discard it altogether, the court accepted because “it was clear that he had something to contribute in order for the case to be solved”.

Vella added that Muscat could have easily chosen to do what others did – secure a shorter prison term and then refuse to testify. Instead, he chose to testify and helped the state solve Chircop’s murder. “While the defence tried to ridicule him, until this very morning we heard how there were concerns about his life,” Vella said.

The prosecutor underlined that what Muscat said was backed by forensic and scientific evidence.

As he made his arguments to the jury, the prosecutor began by reminding the jurors of their role and the level of proof required to find the men guilty.

He underlined that questions do not constitute evidence and that allegations not substantiated by evidence are to be discarded. He also reminded that in the case of the defence, they only have to prove on a level of probability.

Vella also invited them to analyse all the evidence brought forward in the case and use their good sense when deliberating on the verdict.

He then explained how to assess the credibility of the witness, taking into consideration the demeanour, conduct, and character of the witness, the probability, consistency, and other features of his statement, as well as corroboration of those statements with other evidence and all the circumstances of the case.

He then addressed claims by the defence that Chircop’s murder investigation was lacking and argued that in the Caruana Galizia investigation, foreign experts had to be brought in because Malta lacks the expertise.

Vella observed that the defence tried to implicate Kevin Ellul, better known as “Double O”, in the murder by alleging that he manufactured bombs.

Referring to Brigadier Jeffrey Curmi’s report, he stressed that one cannot say that Ellul had been working on the bomb simply because the switch or the GSM module was not found.

From the report, it emerges that the bomb placed under Romeo Bone’s car, the bomb which killed Caruana Galizia, and that used against Ellul had the same manufacturer.

“The brigadier himself told us that had Ellul been working on the bomb, he would have probably ended up maimed,” Vella stressed, adding that while the man sustained injuries, these were not permanent and one could not conclude that they were the result of an accidental detonation.

Moreover, the injuries sustained by Ellul were not compatible with someone who had been working on the bomb.

The prosecutor questioned why the defence insisted on implicating Ellul in the case.

He explained that it all began when Robert Agius requested to make a statement in the magisterial inquiry after proceedings were already initiated against him.

That statement was based on what fellow inmates Melchior Spiteri and Brandon Cachia had told him, and what Nicole Brignone purportedly told Cachia. Vella underlined that Brignone denied telling Cachia that Ellul had gotten the bomb used on Caruana Galizia. “Spiteri’s and Cachia’s testimony are worth nothing,” Vella stressed, adding that the manner in which they had testified made it seem that it was all rehearsed, when they should have been testifying from memory.

He compared Brignone’s testimony, in which Ellul told her “I am not stupid” and refused to get involved, to Ellul’s version in which he denied the allegations and said he did not know the Degiorgio brothers.

“At the end of the day, Brignone’s and Ellul’s testimony are in agreement,” Vella said, adding that the story about Ellul was nothing but a “lie”.

Vella referred to the FBI report and asked the jurors: “Where was the SIM used to detonate the bomb on January 10, 2017? Għargħur? Mellieħa? No. Żebbuġ, where Robert Agius has his garage. And what about the second time? It connected to a cell tower close to Vella’s farmhouse in Mosta.”

He questioned where the evidence was to support the defence thesis, adding that Arnaud testified about an extensive search at Ellul’s property which included sniffer dogs and that the investigators found nothing.

Vella insisted that the story on Ellul was based on a lie and referred to assistant commissioner Keith Arnaud’s testimony on Agius’s statement to the inquiring magistrate, where he had said that he was no longer friends with Ellul.

The prosecutor underlined that innocent individuals do not request pardons.

“One is given a pardon to tell the truth in connection with a particular case. Those who request a pardon are involved in the case. One asks for a pardon in a murder because they are involved in that murder, and for the state to solve a case, it can use this instrument to arrive at the truth and arraign those involved,” Vella said.

The Criminal Court also ordered a face-to-face confrontation between witnesses Azzopardi and Arnaud, relating to Muscat’s pardon.

The defence then closed their evidence stage, with the AG lawyer replying to the points raised by the defence lawyers throughout the past week.

The trial continues on Friday.

Madam Justice Edwina Grima presided.

Prosecutors Godwin Cini, Danika Vella, and Anthony Vella prosecuted.

Lawyers Alfred Abela and Rene Darmanin are appearing for Robert Agius, while lawyer Nicholas Mifsud is assisting Agius’ brother, Adrian.

Lawyers Noel Bianco and Leslie Cuschieri are appearing for George Degiorgio.

Lawyers Ishmael Psaila and Amadeus Cachia are assisting Jamie Vella.

Lawyers Therese Comodini Cachia and Jason Azzopardi are assisting the Caruana Galizia family, while lawyer Vince Galea is assisting the Chircop family