A man accused of involvement in a robbery at a Zejtun ice cream factory seven years ago has been cleared by a court, which found that there was not one single piece of evidence linking him to the theft.

Stephen Borg, 43, had been named by two other alleged accomplices in the robbery. The two admitted their involvement. They told police that  it was Borg who had entered the premises on September 8, 2014.

Workers reported that between €4000 and €5000 in cash as well as CCTV equipment, were missing.

Investigators at the crime scene found fingerprints on aluminum surfaces at the garage where ice cream vans were parked for the night.

The front door appeared to have been forced open.

The total value of the robbery stood around €12,100.

The factory owner told police that a substantial amount of the stolen cash had been returned to him through a priest.

The owner pointed to a suspect who, upon police questioning, confessed his involvement and named another man and Borg as accomplices.

Borg was accused of aggravated theft and breach of four bail decrees.

The prosecution told the court that phone localisation data placed him at the crime scene at 00:15 that night.

A probation officer reported that all urine samples taken from Borg at the time of the allegations, tested positive to drugs.

However, a fingerprint expert confirmed that none of the three prints lifted from the crime scene matched those of the accused.

When delivering judgment, the court, presided by magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit, observed that there was a “serious lack of evidence” by the police, stating further that it was the prosecution’s duty to produce sufficient evidence to lead to moral certainty by the court.

Relevant evidence had not been produced.

The other two men convicted of the theft were never summoned to testify and Borg’s mobile number and localisation were not confirmed.

Instead the prosecution summoned witnesses who either did not know or had never seen the accused.

No one ever saw Borg at the crime scene and there were no fingerprints or CCTV footage linking him to the place.

As a matter of fact, there was not one single piece of evidence to support the charges, concluded the court, thus clearing the accused of all criminal liability.

Lawyer David Gatt was defence counsel.