It’s the ninth day of proceedings in the trial by jury of four men accused of murdering journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia and lawyer Carmel Chircop.
The four men on trial are Robert and Adrian Agius, known as ‘tal-Maksar’, Jamie Vella and George Degiorgio.
Adrian Agius is charged with commissioning the murder of lawyer Carmel Chircop in Birkirkara in October 2015. Jamie Vella and George Degiorgio are accused with executing Chircop’s murder. Degiorgio is accused of executing the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia in separate proceedings that started in December 2017.
Vella and Robert Agius-Adrian’s younger brother-are accused of complicity in the murder of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia by supplying the bomb that killed her.
Prosecutors Godwin Cini, Danika Vella and Anthony Vella are representing the attorney general’s office.
The defence lawyers are Nicholas Mifsud for Adrian Agius, Ishmael Psaila and Amadeus Cachia for Jamie Vella, Alfred Abela and Rene Darmanin for Robert Agius, and Noel Bianco and Leslie Cuschieri for George Degiorgio.
Jason Azzopardi and Therese Comodini Cachia are assisting the Caruana Galizia family, while Vince Galea is assisting the Chircop family.
12:56 A lawyer from the defence team asks about efforts to determine whether the killer may have been in the complex or on the run. He asks whether he noticed, any cigarette butts in the complex, but the witness says he didn’t.
Regarding the alley, he’s asked whether he parked his car in a way that could have blocked access in and out of the alley. He says that he didn’t. He also confirms again that the car he was driving managed to get through the alleyway.
A lawyer asks if he saw people entering or exiting the alleyway, but the witness says this wasn’t the case.
The sitting will now go on break until 3pm. We will continue our reporting then.
12:46 Another constable testifies. He was part of the rapid intervention unit (RIU) on the day of the murder. He was driving around with a colleague in an RIU vehicle when he was notified of the murder.
When he arrived on site he noticed a small alley. He left his car parked in the middle of the road and spoke to a police official. He walked up the ramp and met with other police officials near the garage.
At one point, he was told to move his car as an ambulance was on its way. He moved his car further up, near this alley. When it was time for him to leave, he avoided passing from the main road and managed to squeeze his car through this alley.
12:33 After some more questions from the defence on the various entrances of the garage complex, the constable’s testimony comes to an end.
The next witness is also a constable who was called to the site of the scene. He remained outside the complex to cordon the area off. He spent three hours on site, specifically on the road to make sure people do not enter the site.
He says the scene was chaotic, with many curious passers-by asking what happened, but no one was allowed on site.
The defence team asks whether it was had been cordoned off when he arrived on site. It wasn’t. A lawyer asks him if anyone had blocked access from the nearby alley. He says that there should have been but he can’t remember exactly who was asked to do so, as he was in charge of blocking access from the other side of the road.
12:13 One lawyer asks the witness about a certain ‘Gino l-Mechanic’. The lawyer says he had a key to one of the other entrances to the garage complex. She says she wasn’t aware of this.
With no more questions from the defence or jurors, her testimony ends there. The next witness is is a police constable who was on shift at the Birkirkara police station at the time of the murder. She recalls meeting Augustine Grixti, who guided them to the garage where Carmel Chircop’s body was. Her testimony so far reflects what previous witnesses have said so far: he was found in a pool of blood, and there were gunshots on the walls and door of the garage as well as on the car bonnet.
She mentions that Augustine Grixti discovered the body because his garage was next to Chircop’s.
The defence starts cross-examining the witness, again pressing on the issue of entrances into the garage complex. One lawyer asks her if she knew that there was a small alley at the end of the road. She says that it looked like a dead end, but she does not exclude that there was an alley. The lawyer says that a small car could have passed through this alley.
11:53 The prosecution is asking about the details of their site visit. She explains that they secured the area to make sure the only people on site were the police and medical officers.
The cross-examination starts. One of the defence lawyers is also asking about the details of her visit, such as who she was with and whether she remained inside or outside the garage. “Did you check how may entrances there were in the garage complex, and where they were?”
“No,” she replies. She was only in charge of one entrance near the ramp.
Apart from the police there was a civilian on site–Augustine Grixti. Grixti had gone to the garage complex when he heard the four shots.
Another lawyer asks if she knew of any other entrances and if she was aware of any other people who entered the garage complex from the back entrance. She says she wasn’t informed so, but she wouldn’t have been the person that should have been involved if this happened.
11:38 A police inspector from the anti-money laundering squad is testifying next. She had been stationed at the Birkirkara police station on the day Carmel Chircop was murdered. She had been on shift that day when, at 7:25am, she was informed of the incident. Since the garage complex was within walking distance from the station, they decided to go there on foot. When they arrived, they found the body of the man in the garage. It was the first garage on the left as soon as they entered the complex.
Next to the body was a bag, jacket and mobile phone. There were gunshots on the door and walls of the garage, as well as on the bonnet of the car.
11:06 One juror asks her if there were suspicions elsewhere in the investigation. She says the suspicion was always on Adrian Agius.
Responding to a follow-up question from police, the witness says she had been speaking with Superintendent Keith Arnaud during the investigation. She told him that she spoke with Chircop’s wife, who was insisting on the deal with Adrian Agius. Arnaud had told her that he’s hearing the same thing. When they saw that Adrian Agius was in Italy, they decided that they would question him when he arrives back in Malta.
That marks the end of this testimony. The court is now going on a short break until 11:30am. We will continue our reporting then.
10:59 The next lawyer from the defence team cross-examines the superintendent. He’s asking about incident reports and the garage complex. A lot of this is repetition.
However, the lawyer now asks her if she remembers that there were three entry points into the garage. She doesn’t remember. She says that she only remembers the entry to Triq John Borg.
The lawyer asks about Ryan Schembri, who had fled Malta with millions of euro worth of debt. She says she had not investigated the personal relationship between Schembri and Chircop.
He asks about Jamie Vella. She says that she had never questioned or arrested him.
The lawyer asks: “Did it result to you that Chircop was a director in 14 companies?”. She points out that she was only involved in the investigation up to a certain point in time. He continues asking about his involvement in several companies, and she says she doesn’t remember any of this information. She says that other experts had been asked to investigate these details.
10:40 Another lawyer cross-examines the witness. He asks about the garage complex and if she knew that people were living in those garages. She says she didn’t stay entering into other people’s garages.
He asks whether she knew that Chircop received threats before his murder. However, now she’s remembering that Mallia’s name might have cropped up in a report belonging to Chircop. “I remember that I looked through Chircop’s report, and it could be that Mallia’s name cropped up there. That’s why I’m saying that Chircop’s wife wasn’t the one who mentioned Mallia,” she says.
The lawyer asks about the story of Chircop in Sliema. She says that the police had taken a look at Chircop’s call logs and it did appear that he was on the phone with Adrian Agius in Sliema.
10:27 The lawyer asks if she had interrogated the other debtors int he contract, namely Ryan Schembri and Etienne Cassar. She says she didn’t, but it doesn’t mean that no one else in the police force didn’t. This puzzles the lawyer. The witness says that, at this point, the suspicion was squarely on Adrian Agius.
“I didn’t do the entire investigation because I got transferred. As far as I was involved, only Adrian Agius was interrogated,” she says.
She adds that she spoke with Mallia, but it didn’t appear that there was any cause for concern on the deal. With the More Supermarkets deal, it was clearly falling through. Moreover, Chircop’s wife immediately flagged the deal, particularly the villa promised by Adrian Agius, as something he was concerned about.
10:14 Another lawyer from the defence team continues cross-examining the witness. He is still pressing her about Jeffrey John Mallia, asking why he wasn’t considered more of a suspect when his business relationship with Chircop was the same as that which the lawyer had with Adrian Agius. He argues that both should have been considered suspects if the police were looking at Adrian Agius only because of this deal.
“Agius told us there was never a compromise on the deal. He didn’t say that he refused to give his villa to Chircop,” she says. “His wife told me Chircop kept trying to call Agius but he wasn’t picking up.”
The lawyer also asks her about the story of Chircop on the phone in Sliema. She points out that she had been transferred elsewhere in the police force. Other reports penned by other police officials should be more comprehensive, she says.
The lawyer asks about Mallia again, but the witness insists that Chircop’s wife had never mentioned this man to her. “His wife was concerned about Adrian Agius,” she says.
However, the lawyer is saying that Chircop had received a legal threat from Mallia about their business together. The witness says she doesn’t remember this being mentioned to her during investigations.
10:00 The defence asks her about a certain Jeffrey John Mallia. She says that this man had some business with Chircop, and he was contacted so that the police can understand what this business was, but Mallia was not considered a suspect.
“We tried to see if this business might have caused problems,” she says. The lawyer is asking her why Mallia was interrogated while the notary was ‘interviewed’. “Why was one given his rights and the other just interviewed?” he asks.
She tells him that Mallia was questioned just in case any suspicious might result from the conversation. This was not the case with the notary, who was contacted only because of his role in the deal with Adrian Agius.
She repeats that Chircop’s wife only told police about his worries with Adrian Agius.
The lawyer now asks if Robert Agius was ever interviewed or interrogated or arrested by her. She says this was never the case.
09:53 The defence team starts its cross-examination. One lawyer asks her about the layout of the garage complex where Chircop was found and when she had been notified of the murder. She refers to her notes and says that she was notified at around 8am on the day. He asks when she went on site, and she says that arrived shortly after being notified, possibly half an hour later.
The lawyer is asking lots of questions about the procedures on site, such as the orders given and the roads that were closed off. She says the police cordoned off the area and were given orders that only police and court-appointed experts were allowed near the site.
She tells the court that, according to their investigations and conversations with Chircop’s wife, the biggest worry on his mind at the time of the murder was this deal with Adrian Agius.
09:45 The superintendent briefly explains the deal. Chircop had loaned a substantial sum to people connected to the More Supermarkets. In March 2014, Chircop entered into a contract with the directors of More Supermarkets. One of the debtors on the contract was Adrian Agius.
She says notary Malcolm Mangion was questioned. He had said that Adrian Agius and Carmel Chircop had gone to him regarding this deal.
09:38 The superintendent says there was a communication breakdown after the business started to fall through.
She recalls hearing a story from one of her colleagues. They were in the Sliema area when they saw Chircop speaking on the mobile, argumenting and mentioning the name Adrian. She insists that she was not there to see it, but rather this was what she had been told by a colleague.
09:35 Superintendent Sandra Zammit is our first witness of the day. She’s recalling the day that Carmel Chircop was murdered in a Birkirkara garage complex. She saw a man lying on the ground and covered in a pool of blood. There were no signs of life, just gunshot wounds. A medical team that arrived on site pronounced him dead on the spot.
She says that Chircop, apart from being a lawyer, had some property business. She says that he was involved in a deal with Adrian Agius. However, the deal fell through. Adrian Agius had put his villa up as a guarantee, and Chircop was chasing him on this.
Adrian Agius was abroad at the time, but when he came back to Malta the police interrogated him. Agius explained that he was abroad the day of the murder. He also explained the business deal. “He had explained that they didn’t reach a compromise. That was his last contact with Chirchop. We asked Adrian Agius if he was involved in the homicide, but he categorically denied it,” she says.
They released Agius from arrest so that more investigations can be carried out.
09:26 Good morning and welcome to today’s live blog. It’s the ninth day of proceedings in the jury by trial of the four men accused of murdering journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia and lawyer Carmel Chirchop.
Journalists have just been allowed into the courtroom. Jurors are making their way in too. Proceedings are starting.