The wife and daughter of fisherman and marine biologist Albert Brian Rosso, who disappeared 18 years ago and whose body was never recovered, are holding the State responsible for the acquittal of two men charged with his murder.

They are claiming this was due to the court delay together with shortcomings in the investigation and handling of the criminal proceedings.

Mary Rose Rosso and her daughter Desire filed a judicial protest in the First Hall of the Civil Court against the State Advocate, the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner.

They filed it after, last month, fishermen Anthony Bugeja, 55, and Piero Di Bartolo, 49, were cleared of the murder during a trial by jury held 18 years after Albert Brian Rosso went missing.

Piero Di Bartolo was cleared of murder last month. Photo: Jonathan Borg

“Despite their admission to the murder and the fact that the killers identified the place where the body was thrown at sea, the delay, together with shortcomings in the investigations and the outcome of the criminal proceedings into the case, led to the acquittal for several reasons,” they said in the protest.

One of the reasons, they said, was that two statements in which the accused admitted to the murder were thrown out by the court due to a legal amendment that came into force after the murder. Besides, several witnesses, including investigators, had forgotten details of the case by the time the trial began.

This resulted in a breach of the right to life enshrined in the European Convention for Human Rights and Malta’s Constitution, the family claim. This right was not limited to the protection of life.

The State also had the duty to, in case of a murder, investigate and prosecute within a reasonable time, they said in the protest filed by lawyers Stefano Filletti, Eve Borg Costanzi and Nicole Galea. They called on the State to remedy this by paying the compensation due or face further legal action. 

Brian Rosso was a marine biologist who went missing 18 years ago. Photo: Family handout

The case dates back to October 10, 2005, when Rosso – a marine biologist and medical technician - last reported for work at the San Luċjan Aquaculture Centre, later heading out to meet his business partner. That was the last time Rosso was seen alive.

He was reported missing by his wife who immediately told the police that he was being threatened by some Italian man over the fishing vessel. Police worked upon the suspicion that Rosso’s disappearance had something to do with his fishing business. 

Bugeja and Di Bartolo were interrogated at length, releasing three and four statements respectively. Bugeja and Di Bartolo began to be regarded as suspects when they gave conflicting versions, each pointing the finger at the other. 

They were neither cautioned nor allowed to seek legal assistance, a right which at the time was not provided for under Maltese law. 

Subsequently, both were charged with wilful homicide, possessing a firearm while committing a crime against the person as well as disposing of the corpse. Rosso’s body was never retrieved. 

Anthony Bugeja, centre, was cleared of murder. Photo: Jonathan Borg

The prosecution alleged that Rosso was shot dead during an argument that broke out over a fishing vessel, Desiree, that he co-owned with Bugeja. Police claimed that a violent row broke out when Rosso met Bugeja outside his Marsaxlokk home over the fishing vessel. Bugeja allegedly fetched a firearm and shot Rosso in the presence and in agreement with Di Bartolo who used to operate the vessel.

The men then allegedly placed the victim’s body inside a sack, transported it out to sea and dumped their load near the Freeport, weighing down the sack by means of some stone blocks.

Statements deemed inadmissble 

Last year, the Criminal Court, declared the accused’s statements inadmissible since they were given without legal assistance and could thus result in irremediable prejudice for the accused.

That position was confirmed when the Court of Criminal Appeal in its superior jurisdiction, threw out the Attorney General’s arguments, observing that such statements were “very determining” especially in light of the fact that Rosso’s body was never found.

The AG had argued that the accused had not been allowed to communicate with a lawyer in the very early stages of the investigation because any communication with third parties could hinder the course of justice. But that argument was regarded as “senseless” by the court which observed that the only reason why the men were not allowed to speak to a lawyer was because the law did not provide for that right back in 2005.

It was only five years later that the right to consult a lawyer, for not longer than one hour prior to interrogation, was introduced under Maltese law. In 2016, the right to legal assistance was granted all throughout the pre-trial stage, including during the interrogation. When the trial by jury started last month jurors were not made aware of the contents of the statements.