Car chase lands bail breacher behind bars

A man in breach of bail conditions who led police in Gozo on a car chase and then falsely accused officers of beating him up, has been jailed for 18 months and ordered to pay €29,500.

Charles Paul Muscat had been accused of 13 charges which included violently resisting arrest, insulting or threatening police officers in the course of their duties, failing to obey police orders, dangerous driving and breaching bail conditions on 14 April 2013.

The following month, he was further accused of fabricating evidence, making a false crime report, falsely accusing three police officers of an offence which he knew they were innocent of and defaming them.

The court was asked to revoke his bail and seize his €25,000 bail bond.

The accused had been on bail pending a number of other criminal proceedings against him. One of the bail conditions was that he observes a curfew. On the night between 14 and 15 April 2013, a police patrol had noted the accused’s Fiat Punto parked outside the residence of Emanuel Mercieca, known as Leli l-Malti.

The officers had informed their station of this and continued their patrol. Later on, that night, they came face to face with the accused, driving his car in breach of his curfew. The ranking officer instructed two constables to block the road with their squad car, stop the accused and take his car key. But as soon as the accused saw one officer alight from the car, he drove straight at him and sped off, driving the wrong way up a one-way street. 

A car chase ensued and a roadblock was set up in Triq ir-Rabat Marsalforn. The accused, however drove full-pelt at the road block, missing a police car with three officers in it by inches and headed towards Rabat. The officers gave chase once again and observed him speeding over a pedestrian crossing before evading the police vehicle that was tailing him. 

The officers found the vehicle parked in front of his flat, its engine still making popping sounds as it cooled. After ringing the doorbell and knocking on the door, to no avail, the police knocked down the door and forced their way into the accused’s flat, where they arrested him after a struggle. He was handcuffed and taken to the police station. 

In an email sent to the Commissioner of Police on 30 April that year lawyer Tonio Azzopardi said the accused was alleging that he had been mistreated inside his home by the police. The officers denied this allegation. 

The prosecution insisted that the allegations he made against the three officers were false and had been made to shift focus from his misdeeds or to make his actions look less illegal than they were. 

The man’s defence lawyer insisted that it was his partner who had been at the wheel, that the accused had been asleep at home that night and that the charges were fabrications.  Sonia Vella, the man’s partner, had testified to say that the couple had fought that night and that she had been driving. She had failed to stop because she had a beer bottle in her hand and no seatbelt on.

“There was no reason to suspect Muscat of drug trafficking,” said his lawyer. He had been searched on several occasions and no drugs were found. Police had investigated his assets and found nothing suspicious.

Despite the “attempt to sully his name,” said the lawyer, “the truth is that no drugs were ever found, that he never trafficked any drugs, despite several searches on his person, his house, his car and his partner.”

Muscat was just a government clerk who had nothing to his name, spending what he earned to maintain his children, argued Azzopardi.

The defence had argued that the court was obliged to await the outcome of a Constitutional case he had filed against the Police, arguing that the man’s fundamental human rights were at stake. 

But magistrate Mifsud observed that the obligation was only binding on a court in cases where a Constitutional reference -and not a separate Constitutional case – had been filed.

In an eloquent judgment over 100 pages long, magistrate Mifsud examined in detail the legal doctrines surrounding the case as well as case law and the writings of renowned legal scholars, before going on to deal with the facts of the case.

The accused had told the police at the time of his arrest that he did not know who had taken his car keys and mobile phone but had told the court that it was his partner, Sonia Vella, who had taken them after an argument. The court also observed that four policemen had recognized the accused behind the wheel. 

Magistrate Mifsud ordered that the woman be investigated for perjury.

The court went on to note that a doctor who had examined the accused after his arrest had not seen any signs of violence and neither had the accused mentioned anything of the sort to him. His only complaint was that he had asthma. Neither had the arraigning magistrate felt the need to appoint a medical expert to investigate the claims, after the defence submitted a photograph of the accused on a stretcher in hospital.

The court said, in view of the fact that the accused was charged with attacking public officials, that it “needed to send once again the message to society that this attitude is not acceptable.”

“The police are there to protect the citizen and should not be placed in a position where it is fearful of exercising its right to correct an individual who is breaking the law or, as in the case of the accused, thinks himself ‘untouchable’ with the blessing and support of his grandfather Jack Galea.”

The court encouraged the police to intervene wherever they saw an infringement “with the intention of bringing total harmony to the country.”

Magistrate Mifsud found the man guilty and sentenced him to 18 months imprisonment, together with a fine of €4500 and a 12- onth driving ban. His €25,000 bail bond was also forfeited.

Superintendent Simon Galea and Inspector Frank Anthony Tabone prosecuted. Lawyer Tonio Azzopardi was defence counsel. Lawyer Mario Scerri appeared parte civile for the three police officers.