Police claim Sliema mayor’s friends spreading ‘false allegations’

Police Force reacts to claims that Nikki Dimech signed statement of admission ‘under duress’ by claiming sources who spoke to MaltaToday are liable to legal action under ‘law of the land’

The police force has written to MaltaToday saying that sources speaking to this newspaper can be made liable to legal action “in terms of the law of the land”, in an effort to quash claims made by friends of disgraced Sliema mayor Nikki Dimech.

The force is referring to sources who this week said Dimech had admitted to accusations of bribery “under duress”, because he was denied an asthma inhaler and wanted to be released from interrogation.

The police force says these claims are “false allegations” and that Dimech was brought his inhaler and pills but that he “did not request to make use of them.”

Dimech this week admitted to accusations of having demanded a €5,000 kickback on a €25,000 council tender from Stephen Buhagiar, a canvasser of Nationalist MP and former Sliema mayor Robert Arrigo.

Sources who spoke to MaltaToday said Dimech first signed a police statement – on Wednesday, 11 August – denying the accusations. At 1pm he was then remanded into a police cell at the Floriana headquarters, by interrogating police inspector Angelo Gafà, and reportedly denied his asthma inhaler.

“Nikki was denied his inhaler and by the time he was interrogated a second time, he was having an asthmatic panic attack, and had difficulties breathing,” sources speaking to MaltaToday said.

At 3:30pm, he was taken back into interrogation and at 4pm he signed a second statement, this time admitting having asked for a commission from Buhagiar, for works he carries out for the Sliema council. “He came back home saying he was desperate by the time he was questioned a second time, and had admitted to the charges to obtain a swift release from the police depot.”

The police reaction was issued over 24 hours after MaltaToday published its story.

In a letter received today by MaltaToday, the police force said it “categorically denies all the allegations made by the ‘friends of Mr Nikki Dimech’ that he ‘only signed the second statement to be able to go back home as soon as possible, and that pleas to have his inhaler brought to him at police HQ went ignored’.

“Mr Dimech was afforded all constitutional rights available to all suspects undergoing police interrogation in Malta. He even requested and was allowed to consult with a lawyer of his choice prior to the interrogation. Mr Dimech’s inhaler and pills were also brought to Police General Headquarters, by a friend of his, whilst he was in police custody, however, he did not request to make use of them.”

The force added that “all preliminary investigations into this matter show that the allegations made are untrue and are being spread simply to tarnish the reputation of the Police Force and that of the investigating officer. The Police Force wants to remind that the “sources” behind these false allegations may also be liable to legal action in terms of the law of the land.”

avatar
Who do you thing is PURE in this country ? All those that halt their hands everyone STINKS so I say again Who is INNOCENT try to throw the first STONE my dear BIBI
avatar
Alfred Galea
Police Services in Malta are just a joke. They like to scare people so as to shut them up. [Police Force reacts to claims that Nikki Dimech signed statement of admission ‘under duress’ by claiming sources who spoke to MaltaToday are liable to legal action under ‘law of the land’]..... And what "legal action" will that be?? Libel?? Obstruction of justice?? Extortion?? If the guy had no lawyer present when "interrogated" by the cops then it's their word against his, and they've been known not to tell the truth a lot of times......
avatar
Mary Farrugia
It was bad luck that the police chose to interogate Nikki during sta.maria hols. when everybody is on holiday. Since when people cannot question police actions without the police threatening libel? It's not unheard of for the police to be rough in order to elicit information from detainees, now is it?
avatar
Christopher Galea Scannura
Do you think that if a lawyer was present it would have gone this far? Dimech may be naive for such things, but his lawyer would not have allowed such treatment..He would have either told him not to leave a statement unless charges were pressed or after leaving his statement willingly (I mean the one registered at 12:58) he should have been allowed to leave like a normal citizen...why keep him there??? His friend was sent by the police to collect an inhaler from his family after 3pm and it was handed over them at around 3.30...He had been at the headquarters since 9.30am and in a cell since 1pm (just after leaving his statement)!!! He had been suffering from an asthma attack for 3 hours and he begged for an inhaler.
avatar
Alfred Galea
Just tell the truth....did he or did he not TALK to a lawyer who was present at HQ? That's not very hard to do, because eventually it'll come out in court if it goes that far.
avatar
Christopher Galea Scannura
..I mean he did NOT consult ANY lawyer..he tried calling his lawyer who told him he was abroad and hung up thinking he would call someone else...then he was informed he had made use of his one chance allowed by law!!! As for the police statement...can they say anything different??
avatar
Alfred Galea
[He even requested and was allowed to consult with a lawyer of his choice prior to the interrogation.] By the way, "his" lawyer, in my previous post doesn't mean "his personal" lawyer, it means the lawyer he consulted with. Correct me if I'm wrong.
avatar
Christopher Galea Scannura
...Because he did NOT consult his lawyer!!! He called and learnt he was abroad and then they did not let him make another call..for this they obeyed the law!!!
avatar
Alfred Galea
I'm surprised that his lawyer did not tell him to clam up, seeing as in that democratic country a lawyer is not allowed to be in the room when someone is being questioned by the cops. If Dimech has nothing to hise, he should have just got up and left and if they want to arrest him then they can go ahead and do it. Whenever a cop/cops start off with "we just want to ask you a few questions", just zip up and say nothing. NEVER trust the cops, especially with no lawyer, video, tape recorder or other neutral witnesses present.
avatar
I don't think for a minute that Dimech is innocent.
avatar
Francesco Micallef
Come on obvousley you are gone say that the sources are lying.Police do these things play with someones health shame on them am not saying all of the police but some of them.It is a pitty that because of some dirty police acction the whole fantastic afforts carried out this year by the police forces on criminality and drug findings are then tarnished with the actions of some cheeky policemen.........Commissioner Rizzo your reputation will surley not be effected by this action...................please keep up your excellent work and I am sure you will find out within the police force who acted so badly with the mayor.......
avatar
... is that they are so active on the case. This can only mean that the strings are being pulled by the PN headquarters. This is the same police force that beat an old lady unconscious, killed a family man in their custody then had the 8 o'clock news suggest that he was a child molester, want on the news to promote the stock for datatrack before their public listing - the same police force that never ever take any action when you report a crime. This is the same police force whose primary job is to protect the mafia that has turned this country into one of the most corrupt in Europe.
avatar
Drew
whatever makes you so sure that the police never lie!! remember interrogation is done in closed rooms and no solicitor is present. I also agree with A. Borg bringing the inhaler 3 hrs later is cosidered torture. Mr. Dimech should have been given the inhaler prior to any interrogation. That is his constitutional right.
avatar
Christopher Galea Scannura
Exactly...according to Criminal Code Art 133 : "Any public officer or servant who communicates or publishes any document or fact, entrusted or known to him by reason of his office, and which is to be kept secret, or who in any manner facilitates the knowledge thereof, shall....on conviction....." etc etc So how did the press and the PN know what was in the statements??? What about Data Protection Law...nobody has a right to these documents, especially if they are intended for future court proceedings. Oh..and by the way...providing an inhaler to an asthmatic person more than 3 hours after the attack does not mean granting him his constitutional rights...it means torture!!!
avatar
Alfred Galea
The police were never known to lie and they do everything according to law. ONE question.....WHO tells the reporters WHAT went on behind closed doors during a police investigation??
avatar
Christopher Galea Scannura
Well...they can't really say anything different can they? If so, then once he left his statement, why wasn't he free to go like any other citizen who is summoned...why was there the need for a second statement? Afterall there were no charges or anything incriminating to put him in a cell...at that point it was one man's word against that of another...usually, a situation like this is later handled in court...