Images and videos related to the Isis terrorist group, including macabre 22-minute footage of a kidnapped Jordanian pilot being burnt alive, were found on the mobile phones of two of a group of seven Syrian men who are undergoing court proceedings for alleged involvement in terrorist activity.

An officer from the Malta police counter-terrorism unit gave details in court on Thursday about hundreds of images, videos and audio recordings he had personally analysed.

The witness, whose name is banned from publication, was testifying in proceedings against Ajil Al Muhsen, 21, Adnan Maashi, 21, Yazan Abduklaziz, 26, Ahmed Kadas, 25, Khalil Al Mahmoud, 21, Ahmed Ahmed, 27 and Mohammed Mohammed, 24, who were rounded up in coordinated police raids on April 29.

All are pleading not guilty to a raft of terrorism-related crimes.

Magistrate Nadine Lia heard about the material extracted from the mobile phones of two of the accused, namely Ajil Al Muhsen and Ahmed Ahmed.

The extraction was carried out by court experts and the data was then analysed by the police officer who gave an overview of the contents.

He said there were 123 videos in Al Muhsen’s phone, all showing logos, flags and images of Islamic State leaders, as well as macabre executions, including beheadings.

One of those videos, dating back to 2015, showed a Jordanian pilot who had been kidnapped by the terrorist group, locked inside a cell. He was first interrogated, identifying himself, and later burnt alive.

Asked by defence lawyer Alex Scerri Herrera, the officer confirmed that this execution footage was not publicly available, explaining that there were special units that “shut down” such material if uploaded.

Asked whether there was anything linking that video to any of the accused, the witness replied in the negative.

The police had not identified whoever had shared that material.

Similar material was also found on the mobile phone of Ahmed Ahmed.

The witness explained that both phone owners had applied for membership in 14 telegram channels which subsequently shared those videos and images.

Questioned by the defence on this point, the officer explained that none of the videos were filmed by the accused, the majority having been sent to them through those telegram channels.

But they had to be members thereof to receive that material.

And in case of material from the telegram channel, once viewed it was automatically stored on their phone, the witness explained under further questioning by the defence.

Following that testimony, the court heard submissions on bail.

The prosecution said that besides the charges “being what they are,” with the accused facing a possible maximum punishment of life imprisonment, there were fears that if granted bail the accused would not abide by court orders.

That was particularly so when terrorists, by definition, showed a lack of respect towards authorities and other people’s opinions, argued AG lawyer Rebekah Spiteri. Besides, investigations were still ongoing.

The court said it expected further evidence to support that particular objection to bail.

“If investigations go on for ten years, what about these [the accused]?”asked Magistrate Lia, pointing out that the prosecution always put forward that objection leaving it to the court to get to the bottom of it.

“Sometimes such investigation turns out to have no bearing on the case….I cannot have generic statements,” said the Magistrate.

That was when AG lawyer Antoine Agius Bonnici stepped in, explaining that the in genere inquiry had been re-opened and third parties were being investigated.

The prosecution also feared that the accused would abscond since they had no strong ties in Malta.

Some of the seven had travelled to Malta with false documents.

There was also the fear of tampering with evidence, went on the prosecutor.

Defence lawyer Jose’ Herrera rebutted that it was not fair for the prosecution not to produce civilian witnesses, then state that the inquiry had been re-opened.

Moreover, after the seven men had been charged in court, an amendment was tabled in Parliament to clarify the definition of this crime, including the sharing of material under the definition of terrorist activity.

“And they want to apply it to previous cases,” argued Herrera.

“The prosecution is not even clear as to what constitutes this crime. These seven youths received material….Yet the prosecution has not produced one civilian witness to date,” added defence lawyer Matthew Xuereb.

As for their ties in Malta, there were parents and relatives outside the courtroom ready to offer the property they owned in Malta to guarantee bail for the accused, said Xuereb.

Pending production of the relative documentation in that respect, the defence requested the court to postpone its decision on bail.

The case continues next week.

Inspectors Jeffrey Cutajar and Jean Paul Attard prosecuted together with AG lawyers Antoine Agius Bonnici, Francesco Refalo and Rebekah Spiteri.

Lawyers Jose’ Herrera, Alex Scerri Herrera, Matthew Xuereb, Alicia Borg and Robert Galea are defence counsel.