Man spared jail term over 25-year-long drug trafficking case
Accused of cocaine trafficking and possession on and before September 20, 1998.
A 62-year-old man has been spared an effective jail term after the appeals court heard how his drug trafficking case had taken place 25 years ago and that he has since kicked the habit.
Joseph Rizzo was accused of cocaine trafficking and possession on and before September 20, 1998. He was also charged with aggravated ecstasy trafficking, committing the crime within 200 metres from a place where youths congregate.
In November 2020, the magistrates’ court had convicted him of cocaine trafficking and possession but cleared him of trafficking ecstasy. He was jailed for six months and fined €2,000.
He appealed the judgment in December 2020 and asked the court to covert itself into a drugs court.
The Drug Offenders Rehabilitation Board decided his case in January last year and closed his case definitively.
The court heard how, months before his arraignment, the police had arrested two men, James Muscat and Clifford Sultana. They had been caught in possession of drugs and had both mentioned Rizzo as their supplier. This led the police to charge Rizzo with drug trafficking.
The court heard both men testifying against Rizzo, giving details such as his nickname, Il-pusher, as well as the car he was driving, which had distinctive marks, including a large advert for an automotive product.
Presiding over his appeal case, Mr Justice Neville Camilleri noted that, although Sultana said he was not recognising Rizzo in court, this was nothing but an attempt to protect him.
The court rubbished arguments by the defence that the first court had misinterpreted the facts of the case. Mr Justice Camilleri observed that, according to a report by a clinical psychologist, Rizzo had abused drugs since a tender age, trying various drugs but mainly cannabis. The Drug Offenders Rehabilitation Board told the court that it was satisfied with Rizzo’s rehabilitation progress, which he had concluded successfully.
In the circumstances, given also the passage of time since 1998 for the case to be concluded, the court ruled that Rizzo was an ideal candidate for the suspension of the effective jail term imposed by the first court.
It ruled that the crime of which he was accused was primarily due to his drug addiction and, therefore, suspended the six-month jail term for two years while confirming the fine, payable in 10 instalments of €200 each.
Lawyers Franco Debono and Marion Camilleri were defence counsel.