A police sergeant called a female friend the same night he allegedly raped a woman who had phoned to report a burglary at her home, a court was told. 

Glenn Carabott, 40, was back in court on Thursday as compilation proceedings resumed against him for alleged non-consensual sex with the victim, filming the encounter and committing a crime he was duty-bound to prevent. 

The woman herself, whose name was banned from publication by court order, told the court on Thursday about her connection with the accused. She said she got to know him through her son, who was Carabott’s friend and that the latter would occasionally dine at their home.

She said Carabott had also been assisting her in a legal matter and she also sometimes cared for his elderly mother. 

On the eve of his arrest, the woman had called Carabott “some 20 times” because the following day they were had an appointment with a lawyer.

But he did not take her calls and she ultimately texted to let him know they were worried. 

“We are very worried about you. I hope nothing‘s wrong,” his friend texted him on the eve of his arrest.

Prosecuting Inspector John Spiteri made reference to another call which had apparently been made at 2.15am on the night of the alleged rape, from the accused’s mobile phone to the witness. 

“Yes,” the woman confirmed and explained how some two years ago she had been robbed.

On April 16, she said, rattling sounds at her door had unnerved her, making her suspect there was some burglar at her door. 

She called her son who told her that he was at his girlfriend’s place and directed her to “call Glenn,” which she did.

“I’m handling a reported break in. I cannot come yet,” Carabott had told her.

“How come you called Glenn rather than the police station,”asked the prosecutor. 

“Perhaps I was wrong to do so. It was a windy night. At first I thought it might have been the wind,” the witness said. 

Further questions revealed that she had communicated with the accused over the past two months he has been under preventive custody, in spite of having been denied permission to do so. 

Inspector Spiteri presented an e-mail thread between him and a relative of the accused wherein he had made it expressly clear that the witness was not allowed to visit or communicate with Carabott in jail because she was a potential witness.

Questioned further about that 2am call, the woman appeared to falter.  

“As far as I know I called him. I’m not sure if he called me back saying he could not come over.”

Asked whether she had seen Carabott that night, the woman replied “no” and appeared rather hesitant when the prosecutor asked when she had last seen the accused.

“Who called who,” insisted the prosecutor.

“I certainly did….He came over at around 2am.”

But that reply would have meant that the visit took place before the call registered on the accused’s mobile.

The witness’s answers prompted a strict warning from Magistrate Gabriella Vella.

“Your testimony is not convincing,” said the magistrate, warning the witness about the serious consequences of perjury. 

As the woman’s testimony was suspended, Inspector Spiteri requested the court to appoint a technical expert to access the telephone system at Corradino Correctional Facility to trace all calls between the accused and third parties, except privileged calls to his lawyer. 

The request was upheld, while defence lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Charmaine Cherrett informed the court that a bail request was to be kept pending for the time being. 

Inspector Michael Vella testified about the events that led to the sergeant’s arrest on the evening of April 20 at police headquarters.

Initially, Carabott had admitted that he had gone to the scene of the reported burglary alone and stayed there for “20 minutes”, denying all allegations.

Datatrak records later showed that the police car had actually been there for some 50 minutes. 

The alleged victim, accompanied to Mater Dei hospital for medical tests, had mentioned a “tissue” and a “sweater rinsed by the accused in the kitchen sink” used after the sexual activity.

Those items were subsequently seized by police and handed over to the DNA expert.

The accused, after requesting legal assistance, had told investigators that the alleged victim had wanted to film porn, but he refused to share that footage.

The video on the accused’s phone, lasting seconds, showed the alleged victim performing oral sex, a police belt in view.

When shown that footage, the woman had been shocked and said she did not know about the video, Inspector Vella said.

The case continues. 

Lawyer Alfred Abela appeared parte civile.