For the second time, Lovin Malta referred to information on which there is a court ban. The first time was when it published Superintendent of Police Keith Arnaud’s testimony in court. In this instance, Lovin Malta told us that Arnaud told the court that Yorgen Fenech had told him that he had paid half a million euro to Melvin Theuma to commit this murder.
There are two problems with this testimony. First, Arnaud was reading from his notes and no recordings exist of this conversation between these two men. Therefore, what Arnaud has said under oath does not hold in court because it was given without prejudice; a legal term meaning that what was said cannot be used in court.
Furthermore, with his statement, Arnaud is contradicting his star witness, Melvin Theuma. Under oath, Melvin Theuma testified that he received 150,000 euros for the Daphne Caruana Galizia murder. Now, Arnaud is stating that Yorgen Fenech told him that he had given him half a million. Who is saying the truth? Theuma, Arnaud or Fenech? Assuming that Fenech did tell Arnaud such a stupidity and therefore what Arnaud is saying is true, why on earth did the police recommend that Melvin Theuma be granted a presidential pardon when such key information regarding what was paid for this murder does not tally with the supposed statement made by Yorgen Fenech?
Now, Lovin Malta comes out with another titbit. This time round the source is a post by Matthew Caruana Galizia himself. Once again, this information, to which Caruana Galizia makes reference, is taken from court evidence on which there is also a court ban. This time, the news item is about a supposed affair between Yorgen Fenech and Keith Schembri’s secretary. Lovein Malta tells us that Joseph Muscat knew about this affair! But why does Matthew Caruana Galizia have such a vested interest to have this published? Is it to detract attention from his family affairs? And who cares whether Muscat did or did not know. It is totally irrelevant and nobody’s business for that matter. Why is there such a morbid interest in sexual relationships? This is extremely odd particularly the more so when considering the quarters leaking this news.
This anecdote was published after the public got to know that Daphne Caruana Galizia’s laptop had been destroyed! What info did this particular laptop contain that the family did not want the world to discover? Any statement by the family to the effect that they had gone through its contents and there was nothing untoward is not tenable for the simple reason that, had there been nothing of relevance on the laptop, why not have the decency to hand it over to the proper authorities? Instead the family sent it off to Germany and then gave instructions for the contents to be destroyed.
We also know that Daphne Caruana Galizia’s car was only left out – and not parked inside the compound – on the night before she was murdered. It was left outside by Matthew Caruana Galizia, the one person who knows what was on his mother’s laptop and leaked information on which there is ban by court. Thus, the obvious question is whether there was any information on that laptop that would shed light on what actually happened on that Sunday that prompted whoever is behind the murder to have the murder executed in a hurry according to one of the hitmen?
There is then the serious issue that information is being passed on to the press in defiance of court orders. The Caruana Galizia family and its representative have reduced the court authority to a nullity and the only explanation for this action is that they are deliberately attempting to hamper and hinder, if not even obstruct, the compilation of evidence. To use the Maltese that explains it all; they are constantly attempting to ‘jintralċa l-provi’. Meaning they are repeatedly attempting to tamper and destroy evidence and obstruct the smooth running of the law. And I must say they are succeeding with impunity. There are also the public declarations whether under the protection of parliamentary immunity or via NGOs or via witnesses who change their version each time they take to opening their mouth. All this is happening under Magistrate Rachel Montebello’s watch. Curiously, one cannot fail to ask: What interest has the Caruana Galizia family to be so hell bent on compromising this case?
After reading the last article by Lovin Malta about the supposed illicit affair of Yorgen Fenech, one is tempted to ask whether this is not the case of the kettle calling the pot black? Neither Peter nor his son Matthew are virgin pure or forthright as they would have us believe.