A man who admitted damaging a large glass pane and racking up over €2,000 in damages after being involved in a scuffle outside Hugo’s Boutique Hotel has been sent to jail for nine months.

The incident took place on Wednesday morning when the police were alerted to some commotion in the vicinity of the Paceville hotel.

An argument appeared to have triggered a scuffle which resulted in damage to the glass pane on the hotel facade, explained Inspector Saviour Baldacchino during the arraignment of Abdi Malik Omar Ismail. 

Police officers who went on site identified the accused as the suspect behind the damage.

The 27-year-old Ethiopian national was escorted to court on Friday, pleading guilty to willful damage to third-party property and disturbing public peace. 

As the hearing got underway, the prosecutor informed the court, presided over by Magistrate Ian Farrugia, that he had just received a quotation for the expenses which totalled €2,053.

After being granted time to reconsider his plea, the accused confirmed his admission. 

When making submissions on punishment, Charmaine Cherrett, the accused’s legal aid counsel, pointed out that the incident involved some argument with a third party which gave rise to a commotion during which her client fell onto the glass.

In fact, the accused had injured his hand.

Not only did he register an early guilty plea, but he was also willing to reimburse the expenses if granted sufficient time to do so. 

The prosecution’s main concern stemmed from the fact that the accused could provide no fixed address, said Inspector Baldacchino.

The accused had first told police that he lived in Gozo, but later they found out that he was squatting with some mates at some rundown premises in St Julian’s.

That fact, together with his criminal record sheet, rendered him unreliable, went on the prosecutor.

The defence rebutted that the charges relating to this incident were “both minor” and did not merit imprisonment, especially in light of the circumstances of the case, his full cooperation and his commitment to cover all expenses. 

“Are you guilty of what you are charged,” the magistrate once again asked the accused.

“Yes,” repeated the man, standing up as he addressed the court.

After hearing submissions and after considering the relative legal provisions, the court condemned the accused to a nine-month effective jail term.

His lawyer gave notice of appeal.