Pensioner cleared after stuffed bird oversight landed him in hot water

A pensioner from Kirkop has been cleared, on appeal, of possessing an old stuffed bird without a permit after a court heard that the animal had been a laboratory specimen used by his brother.

Leonard Buhagiar’s troubles with the law began five years ago when police officials visiting his home to check his 250-strong stuffed bird collection, had discovered a very old specimen of a ring ouzel, a bird belonging to the thrush family and similar to the common blackbird, that had not been declared.

Buhagiar had been fined €500 in 2014 for having kept the protected species in breach of the Wild Birds Regulations and without the necessary permits and certification. He had subsequently filed an appeal, contesting the conviction and asking for the revocation of the punishment.

The Court of Appeal had to hear all the evidence afresh after it emerged that the testimonies heard during the proceedings before the first court had not been recorded or transcribed.

The appellant had told judge Antonio Mizzi, presiding the Court of Criminal Appeal,  how he had been given an old collection of stuffed birds by an acquaintance who had assured him that all the birds were properly registered.

The pensioner told the court that the bird was “older than myself.”

The court was told that the failure to register the specimen was probably down to an oversight since the bird might have been in his brother’s possession when the official list was drawn up.

The man’s brother explained to the court that the ouzel had belonged to the school laboratory where he used to teach biology before retirement.

As the stuffed bird had been damaged, the teacher had entrusted the appellant to find a taxidermist to repair it. But it seems the man had forgotten all about the bird until the inspection by the MEPA and Administrative Law Enforcement Officers at his home.
 

Having seen the evidence and heard the version given by the defendant, the court said that the explanation given was plausible, as it noted that the collector had informed the authorities of his collection twice, which showed his bona fides.
 

The appeal was upheld and Buhagiar was cleared of the charges.
 

Lawyers Franco Debono and Yanika Vidal were defence counsel.