In today’s sitting, a number of police and residents, who went to the scene of crime, were called to testify. Another witness was inspector Kurt Zahra.
According to The Times live reporting, there were five main points discussed today at court.
First there was the actual murder. There was a vivid description of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s gruesome death. The descriptions are extremely disturbing.
The second was related to Yorgen Fenech seeking pardon. On this point there is nothing to analyse as the witness was heard behind closed door.
The third point is that Assistant Attorney General Philip Galea Farrugia was replaced by Dr. Anthony Vella. The Times wrote: “There’s a new face at the prosecution bench today: Anthony Vella replaces Philip Galea Farrugia as the representative of the attorney general’s office.” This begs the question. Has Anthony Vella permanently replaced Galea Farrugia or was this just a temporary substitution because Galea Farrugia could not attend?
Then, there were two other major points that need to be discussed.
The first one is the fight that Matthew Caruana Galizia had with a neighbour because Caruana Galizia suspected that Mr. Vella had taken photos of his mother. I cannot understand all this fuss about taking photos. Therefore, why was Caruana Galizia acting like that to the extent that he had even scratched Vella’s chest and broke his mobile phone. Why was Matthew Caruana Galizia so worried and nervous about this fact? It was a hysterical reaction. After reading the terrible moment of Daphne’s death, I will not state that after all his mother was in the habit of publishing photos from the private lives of individuals but if I was in his shoes, I would not have any inkling to quarrel and fight with neighbours. But everyone has their own character.
The second piece of evidence is even more disturbing. This concerns the car used on the day Daphne Caruana Galizia was murdered. We know for a fact that Matthew Caruana Galizia admitted that he had left the car outside the garage because he was lazy. We also have the testimony given by one of the hitmen that they were worried as to how they were going to place the bomb in the car because they expected it to be parked in the garage.
Today, as a result of a question asked by Superintendent Arnaud to Mr Sant, a neighbour of the Caruana Galizias, we learn that Daphne Caruana Galizia was not driving her USUAL CAR. She was using a different car: from another sitting, we know that it was a white Peugeot 108 rented from Percius Car Hire.
It follows to ask an obvious question. How did the hitmen know that Daphne would be using a different car on Monday and not her usual car? From where did the hitmen get the information that on that day, Monday 16 October 2017, Daphne Caruana Galizia was not going out with her usual car but with a rented one – the same car that Matthew Caruana Galizia had left outside the garage because he was too lazy to put it inside?
Yet, the mystery related to the car Daphne was driving on the day she was assassinated does not stop here. From today’s evidence, it emerges that there were three different car keys, all related to the same car, in which two bombs appear to have been planted.
One of the witnesses stated that he picked up, from the ground a car key which matched that of a Peugeot vehicle so as not to let it end up under the wheels of the approaching fire engine. Then, though not mentioned, there was another Peugeot car key found inside the destroyed car. There should be no doubt that the car key found in the road was not the same one, as the one used by Daphne Caruana Galizia at the time of her death. Given that her car was “in a ball of fire”, it is unlikely that the car key would remain unscathed. In fact, Superintendent James Grech testified that he went to Percius, the car hire firm Daphne used, in order to obtain a key to the Peugeot 108.
Have the police investigated these last two points and questioned how did the hitmen know that Daphne Caruana Galizia was going to use this particular car that morning and not her usual car?