Today, there was the compilation of evidence against Yorgen Fenech. What came out during the sitting are even more absurdities which at best are usually reproduced in third-rate films about the Mafia. Incidentally, before the session began, Matthew Caruana Galizia and the defence lawyer of the parte civile were seen talking to one of the main witnesses of the police, the individual from Interpol who is responsible for the extraction of data.
Lest we forget Matthew Caruana Galizia was today in court as a witness to give evidence about his expertise as a computer analyst and specialist. Since when are key witnesses allowed to be hobnobbing in the corridors of our courts?
Imagine had a member of Fenech family gone up to talk to the Interpol or Europol witness? All hell would break loose. And without fail he/she would be charged with contempt of court ipso facto.
Quite a different story though for the Caruana Galizias. In their case, they are reserved the same privileges that are shown to the Mafiosi in Sicily. Identical special treatment no more no less.
What is even worse is the fact that when the defence raised this point. – according to the Malta Independent – the prosecution protested vehemently. One would have expected the parte civile to protest but having also the Prosecution supporting this sort of behaviour is even more disturbing and unacceptable especially when one considers that Matthew Caruana Galizia has never handed over all the data to the police.
Then, we have what Matthew Caruana Galizia has stated under oath. He once again mentions the story that his mother was killed because of Electrogas. We heard a lot of hearsay. We are told to believe him because he is recounting what his mother was stating. But where is the evidence of all this? The evidence was in his mother’s computer. But the data in this computer was destroyed by the order of the Daphne Caruana Galizia family, and therefore also by his express order as he is part of that family. What a lark! And now we have an umpteenth version of his, that “no sensitive documents were saved to Daphne Caruana Galizia’s devices”. According to Matthew Caruana Galizia the sensitive data about 17 Black was stored on an encrypted hard drive or whatever instead.
But the whole saga does not stop here. We heard under oath the representative of the Europol testifying. He took the stand before Matthew Caruana Galizia. He clearly stated that the Maltese police do not have the means to access encrypted data. Therefore, all that has been stated by Matthew Caruana Galizia in the past that he did not give the computer to the Maltese police because he did not trust them is a falsehood. Let us not forget Matthew is an expert in IT. Today we learn that our police does not yet have the means to access Daphne Caruana Galizia’s computer or any other computer they would need to access. Access would have to be carried out in mainland Europe. Once Matthew is an IT expert, he must have known all along that our police did not have the expertise to access encrypted data therefore, what is the true reason why the computer was never handed to the police? It is obvious that there was something to hide from the police, despite the fact that he has declared in court that there was nothing of consequence on his mother’s computer.
Sorry Matthew, but you have been lying through your teeth from the very beginning when you stated that you did not give the computer because you did not trust our police.
What is even more interesting is the fact that Matthew insisted that his mother was killed because of Electrogas. This is also another contradiction because the parte civile lawyer, Jason Azzopardi, has in the past stated that Daphne Caruana Galizia was killed because of the investigations that she was carrying out regarding the deal with Montenegro. Who is stating the truth in this whole scenario of lies? Both or neither of them?
But to crown the entire mise en scene with the Caruana Galizias and their lawyer pulling the strings we now learn that Matthew has lost his mobile. Incredible. Under oath, he states that he lost his mobile therefore he cannot substantiate what he was saying to the magistrate. This is the second time that a mobile has gone missing in this case. The first was that of Keith Schembri. In both cases, the prosecution and the police were not capable of recovering these ‘lost’ devices. It is only in mafia cases that such a scenario is put in place.