Police inspector Elton Taliana awarded damages

Police Inspector Elton Taliana has been awarded €2,000 in damages after a court ruled a MaltaToday article, which suggested that he had links to criminality was libellous.

In August 2013, an article published by the newspaper claimed that the inspector was subject to internal scrutiny over the wrongful prosecution of Daryl Luke Borg and had possibly talked to Borg before his testimony to the police board.

It also alleged that he had been investigated over an arson attack on MaltaToday editor Saviour Balzan’s residence in 2007 and had ties with criminals.

MaltaToday’s former midweek editor Raphael Vassallo was named as the defendant in the case.

From the evidence, the court noted that the plaintiff, a police inspector, had arraigned Roderick Grech in connection with a 2013 hold up, which Grech had pleaded guilty to.

Two days before, however, two other police inspectos had arrainged Darryl Luke Borg for the same offence, which Borg had not admitted to. After Grech’s admission, Borg was released and an internal police inquiry was appointed to investigate the matter.

Noting that former Commissioner of Police Peter Paul Zammit had testified that Taliana had arraigned the right person, the court held that it was not true that Taliana was “at the heart of the mistaken arraignment” as the article had claimed.

On the internal inquiry into Taliana’s alleged links to criminality, the court noted that the police had refused to produce Taliana’s personnel file under the pretext that ongoing investigations could be “irreparably prejudiced.”

The file had been leaked by Taliana’s ex-wife, said the court, noting that the two had been in the midst of annulment proceedings at the time. It had been the same woman who had informed the police that the inspector had been involved in the throwing of paint and an arson attack on Balzan’s home. But Balzan had been informed by the police that Taliana had no connection to the attacks.

Magistrate Francesco Depasquale held that there was “no doubt” that the allegations were solely intended to defame and harm the reputation of the plaintiff.

The magistrate dismissed the defence’s arguments that the inspector was subject to higher public scrutiny by virtue of his position and that the allegations were “fair comment” on facts which were substantially true and verifiable. Fair comment could not be used to defend the indefensible, said the court. The article “Inspector in wrongful prosecution was investigated over 2007 arson” was declared defamatory and libellous. The defendant was ordered to pay €2,000 in damages.

MaltaToday managing editor Saviour Balzan said he would be appealing the decision "in the face of damning evidence presented in court."