Compensation case on Darryl Luke Borg arrest dismissed

A constitutional case for compensation on the wrongful arrest of 27-year-old Darryl Luke Borg in 2013 has been dismissed after Mr Justice Tonio Mallia decided that the police did not act negligently and that their suspicion in Borg was justified.

The case goes back to August 8, 2013, when Borg, from Birkirkara, was wrongly prosecuted for a hold-up in Birkirkara the night before at around nine. A day later, Borg was acquitted and released after another man, 22-year-old Roderick Grech, admitted to the crime.

The following week, Borg’s lawyers, David Camilleri and Joseph Gatt, filed for compensation, complaining that their client should not have been arraigned in the first place, or denied bail, and that the police should have released Borg a day earlier, on 8 August when the police learned that Roderick Grech had admitted to committing the hold-up.

The case also saw the Police Board find prosecuting Inspector Elton Taliana – who, strangely, was not summonsed to testify in this case – guilty of failing to take the necessary steps which would have immediately freed Borg while another man pleaded guilty to the charges.

In the constitutional case filed against the Attorney General, the Director of Criminal Courts and Tribunals, and Police Commissioner Peter Paul Zammit, Darryl Luke Borg argued that his right against unfair arrest was breached because the prosecution only withdrew charges on August 12, 2013, three days after Roderick Grech had admitted to the same offence.

“Once the police became aware of Roderick Grech’s admission, they should have ensured the release of Darryl Luke Borg, who at that moment was being held in custody illegally. Darryl Luke Borg spent an extra day in prison after it was established that the police knew that a third party had admitted to the offence,” the plaintiff’s lawyers held.

But much to the disdain of the court, neither Inspector Elton Talia nor the witnesses summonsed by the police’s board of inquiry were called to testify.

“The court wanted to know when and at what time Roderick Grech was interrogated by the police and what did the police do when it had this information. This had to be done by calling the people involved before the court, and not by referring to the Police Board’s investigation.

“The court cannot confirm what had occurred simply on the basis of the board’s findings because the witnesses summonsed by this report failed to confirm this information during court proceedings.”

Consequently, in determining as to why the police did not withdraw criminal proceedings earlier, the court dismissed the plea because it did not know anything about Taliana’s investigation and the subsequent arrest of Roderick Grech.

Borg also claimed that his arrest was not justified because at the time of the offence he was at home, and that the perpetrator seen in CCTV footage was considerably taller than he. 

While admitting that it was “perhaps difficult for the police to establish that the man recorded by the CCTV was in fact Darryl Luke Borg,” nevertheless, the Constitutional Court ruled that the police reasonably saw a resemblance between the man on the CCTV and the plaintiff’s hairstyle, physique and Facebook photo.

Taking into account Borg’s past theft and drug charges, the fact that he was undergoing theft proceedings, the court argued that the police’s suspicions were justified. In addition, the police had received a tip-off that the plaintiff committed the offence.

“As long as the police’s suspicions are justified, it is irrelevant whether the circumstances were enough to prove that Borg was guilty. The police did not act negligently, but in line with their duties,” the Court held.

Moreover, the court said that it could not establish whether the plaintiff was in fact at home at the time of the offence because the evidence of the plaintiff’s mother – who was allegedly also at home at the time of the offence – was not reliable.