Man murdered over lost job, jury told

The jury trying an Ivorian man for the murder of a Malian migrant at the Hal Far detention centre has been told that the motive was revenge over a lost job.

This emerged as jurors began to hear evidence in the murder trial of Fodie Keita, 40, who is accused of the murder of 30 year old Adame Diabate from Mali in 2010. He is also accused of hiding Diabate’s body and stealing his mobile phone.

According to the Bill of Indictment, on 6 June 2010 at around 5pm police received a report of the discovery of a body buried under a tree near the Hal Far Open Center. The body was found after a passerby noticed its toe poking out of the shallow grave. 

The body had a number of extensive head wounds and defensive wounds on the hands.

The victim’s personal effects were buried together with it, which helped police identify it as Adame Diabate, who resided at the Open Center. A knife handle bearing the initials F and K were also found with the body.

An examination of the deceased’s phone led to the discovery that his alleged killer had answered a phone call and told the caller that Diabate had fled to Italy, when in fact Diabate was already dead.

Some bloodstained banknotes amounting to €1,164 were also found on the person of the accused.

Keita was arrested after telling police a version of events that did not tally with the evidence they had so far.

Keita had introduced Diabate to his employer and the two had started working together, but after a while the men’s employer had stopped communicating with the accused, allegedly because he was more satisfied with Diabate’s work and had, in fact, carried on employing him.

The prosecution is alleging that Keita, angry at having lost his job to the victim and having told a number of people that he would be paying the man back, proceeded to murder him.

Diabate was stabbed several times on the head, before his skull was crushed by a heavy object.

Keita denies the charges. He is being defended by legal aid lawyers Marc Sant and Simon Micallef Stafrace.

“This was an ugly crime and an unfortunate one,” said Lawyer Lara Lanfranco, who is prosecuting together with lawyer Kevin Valletta from the Office of the Attorney General. “A person described as having a heart of gold, who came to Malta seeking a better life…his one problem was meeting the accused...He in no way invited this, he was a victim of circumstance.”

Retired CID inspector Anthony Portelli was the first witness to take the stand. “As soon as we went to the scene a security official ...told us he had been approached by four immigrants who told him there was a body buried nearby.”

There was a blood trail and dragging marks on the ground he said, leading him to suspect foul play and immediately informed the duty magistrate.” Police found the deceased and a haversack with documents belonging to Adama Abate, who had failed to return to the Open Centre that night. The body was curled up “like a ball” said the inspector.

Police had spoken to a number of residents about a knife handle that was found near the body. The handle bore the initials F and K. The other residents immediately pointed the police in Keita’s direction, saying he had recently had a falling out with the deceased.

One of the mobile phones found in the accused’s possession belonged to the deceased. Service providers data said that the accused’s SIM card had been inserted into the man’s mobile phone around the time of death. The deceased had been carrying a mobile hands free kit but no mobile phone.

Keita was taken into custody.

He began behaving erratically, speaking about killing himself and was referred to Mount Carmel Hospital.

The victim’s skull had been smashed, he said, adding that the body had only recently been killed when it was discovered.

“When we told him about the knife with his initials, he stated that he wanted to change his name to Eliza.”
Defence lawyer Marc Sant argued that initials could have belonged to other immigrants. That was true said the witness, but reminded the jury that the deceased’s mobile was also found on the accused’s person.

Asked how they knew the mobile belonged to the deceased, he explained that the device’s IMEI number had been sent to mobile service providers and traced to a line that the deceased was using, and later to one used by the accused.

Just hours before his death, the mobile was seen in the possession of the deceased, said the former policeman. 

The trial continues.