BishopAccountability.org
	Attorney General Explains Risks of Correcting Charges Times of Malta August 9, 2011 http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110809/local/Attorney-General-explains-risks-of-correcting-charges.379421 Correcting a charge at a late stage of court proceedings was risky and could even lead to the whole case collapsing, the Attorney General noted yesterday in relation to the case of two priests sentenced to prison over sexual abuse of children. A mistake in the charges led one of the two priests to be acquitted of rape even though the magistrate said the crime did actually take place. The priest had raped a boy at St Joseph Home in Sta Venera and not in Marfa, as indicated in the bill of indictment, the court noted. This led to a debate on whether the mistake could be corrected. In a statement last night, the Attorney General noted that the accused had been arraigned on October 13, 2003 and the first sitting was held on October 28. The prosecution concluded its evidence on May 5, 2004 and the defence then started making its case, declaring on March 9, 2011 it had no further evidence to produce. The Attorney General noted that the victims formed part of the case all along and were represented by a legal counsel of their choice. The Attorney General pointed out that his office did not conduct the prosecution in the Magistrates’ Court. “However, above all, it must be noted that, in such cases, the correction of the charges at an advanced stage of the court case has its consequences and risks to the prosecution. The accused could ask to be notified afresh with all acts of the case and they could even ask for all witnesses to be heard again. To the prosecution this could run the risk of the case becoming time-barred whereby the proceedings, even in the case of charges that are not corrected, may not be able to go ahead and the whole case could dissolve. “Fresh hearings also ran the big risk of delays, mistakes and discrepancies between one witness and another. Thus, correcting the charges is not a final solution and if this occurs at an advanced stage of the case, it could also lead to the whole case collapsing,” the Attorney General explained. He noted that the discrepancy with regard to the place where the offence took place was raised for the first time in the judgment handed down by the Magistrates’ Court, which has since been appealed. Because of the appeal, the case was still sub judice and, thus, it was not right at this stage for the prosecution to make any comments on the merits of the case, the Attorney General said. The prosecution made such comments in its submissions to the court. Finally, the Attorney General pointed out that Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri had been appointed Attorney General on May 11, 2004 while the incumbent, Peter Grech, took office last September 9.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.