Oh, for crying out loud – now it's Lourdes, and with a suspected smuggler's brother as a character witness.
Look out, my dear - there's a leering old man coming up behind you with his hand directed at your bottom. You'd think we'd be safe from that kind of thing in Lourdes, but no.
On timesofmalta.com now:
Taking the witness stand, Fr Gorg Dalli said he had known Dr Arrigo for nine years and just before this case they had been talking about going to Lourdes, which Dr Arrigo had visited several times.
Fr Dalli said Dr Arrigo had spoken to him and told him that he had made “administrative mistakes”. He admitted to him that he felt sorry for what he had done. He wanted his whole family to go up to Lourdes but this had not happened. Fr Dalli also spoke about how Dr Arrigo had taken a theology course.
Fr Rene Camilleri said he got to know Dr Arrigo because of some of the cases he had in the family court when he was still a judge. He also met him through the Faculty of Theology. He never told him his direct motivation for starting the course.
Recently, they spoke at length about how he was dealing with the case.
As a character, he never doubted his values and principles. It was obvious that Dr Arrigo was a person who was getting a lot of comfort out of prayer.
Maybe we should point out here that Fr Dalli has a suspected drug smuggler for a brother and a cabinet minister and future EU Commissioner for another. I don’t think it’s irrelevant. Nor do I think he should be acting as a character witness for somebody found guilty of taking a bribe from a drug-dealer when he’s got a brother who was himself investigated for drug-dealing.
So terrific, isn’t it? Judge Arrigo is a character witness for a cocaine smuggler. Then he takes a bribe from another drug-dealer. Then when he ends up in court and needs a character witness of his own, he hauls in a suspected drug-smuggler’s brother. Oh baby, what a country.
It’s so southern Mediterranean, all this confusion of crime with religion. Drugs and crucifixes – suddenly, they’re going together like a horse and carriage. Somebody remind these people that separation of church and state applies in the field of reparation and punishment, too. Whether Noel Arrigo has now lost himself in a career devoted to chest-beating, prayer, theology and visits to Lourdes (to cure him of what, exactly?) is totally irrelevant. That’s between him, God, and the priests of his religion.
He is not going to be forgiven by the state or escape punishment by the state because he has made religious reparation, even if I could believe his freshly discovered religiosity, which I can’t.
As for those “administrative mistakes” – it’s bad enough having a priest describe the crime of bribery that way, but if this is how the ex chief justice described his behaviour, then he really is unable to distinguish between right and wrong, which is why he is going down still justifying his actions.
“As a character, he never doubted his values and principles” – oh, don’t make me laugh. What values and principles might those be? I’m quite sure there are some worldly priests out there, but it squares with Arrigo’s personality that he picked a sheltered one to speak to. To anyone else, the idea of Noel Arrigo and Lourdes, or Noel Arrigo and values and principles, is the opening line for a wisecrack.
Madonna, x’pajjiz.
39 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Dr Arrigo was nothing but a greedy rat, he put his self interest first and foremost. I cannot imagine such evidence or character reference from a priest in an English court. They would find it hilarious and it would be counter-productive.
Arrigo was desperately clinging to every straw to save his backside.
And that would take a hell of a lot of straws, would it not?
Cannot agree with you more … Where is the dividing line between state and religion? Where is the archbishop in all this? Give me a break and the final punishment for this case as it’s becoming too blooming pathetic. Kif ma jisthux dan-nies? I just cannot believe such things.
Mela first we mess up and then we expect to be forgiven ghax immorru Lourdes … Geeeez!
“Madonna, X’pajjiz ” – Pajjiz tal biki . When Dr Arrigo was a judge he gave a character reference to Godfrey Ellul, who was caught red handed dealing in drugs, and now ex Chief Justice Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici gives a character reference to ex Chief Justice Noel Arrigo taking a bribe from a drug dealer.
As for Fr Rene Camilleri, he comes from an institution which has consistently covered up for paedophile priests, rather than reporting them to the police. So why not also cover up for a corrupt chief justice?
During a Xarabank program last year ex Chief Justice Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici was asked how often one gets justice in court. He replied 50% of the time – yes and 50% of the time – no.
I was shocked to hear such a senior ex-member of the judiciary make such admission in public.
Daphne, what the priests said is what they observed, after the crimes were committed. While serving sentence he still can continue furthering his studies in Sacred Theology; tutors will be provided and if he has become a man of prayer there is a chapel at Kordin and he can recite the rosary together with the Corradino community every evening.
I visit prison every now and then and I can tell you that the authorities there will provide you with all your legitimate requests. A prison warden always tells me that at Kordin they can provide lodging for anyone: police commissioners, bankers, businessmen, fraudsters, thieves, drug pushers, murderers, politicians, judges, lawyers, etc.
I can tell you that on entering even as a service provider I always visualise Dante’s ‘Perdete ogni speranza, o voi ch’entrate’.
Why the hassle of visiting Lourdes when Borg in-Nadur is round the corner?
Porkerija tissejjah bil-Malti! Shame on those giving these so-called character references in these circumstances. Unbelievable in this day and age.
It is not Fr. Gorg Vella but Gorg Dalli according to TVM news at 8. John Dalli’s brother, who said that Noel was longing to go to Lourdes with him.
[Daphne – Thought as much!]
Noel Arrigo’s attempted dodges are pathetic to say the least.
Then again, it seems quite a few have been taken in by the priestly bollocks (see Comments) :
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091124/local/noel-arrigo
This ‘Holy Toast stamper’ works wonders and saves you from wearisome pilgrimages: Marian Apparition – miracles any time you please!
http://www.worldwidefred.com/holytoast.htm
This is what Dr Frank Portelli said about Patrick Vella the other convicted criminal on his release from prison, I wonder what Dr Portelli has to say about Arrigo now!:
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080712/local/ex-judge-in-bribery-case-leaves-jail-after-16-months
Dr Frank Portelli MD FRCS(Ed) (on 12/7/08)
Patrick Vella has paid the price that our society demanded for his guilt .
As you say he apologised unconditionally and declared he was sorry for the damage he caused.
The sin was terrible – and the price according to the law of the land
Now Patrick Vella needs to heal and to reintegrate into our society.
He needs all the space and assistance possible
Essentially a good man – who faltered and slipped … and with the grace of God has redeemed himself
Like many other human beings
Dr Frank Portelli MD FRCS(Ed)
I think everyone should declare the case closed where Patrick Vella is concerned. At least he pleaded guilty, did not act holier than thou and let’s face it, is serving a life sentence of sorts.
Whether we agree with his actual sentence or not, he’s served it and now deserves to be left in peace.
“timesofmalta.com Jesmond Micallef (3 hours, 40 minutes ago)
People make mistakes, it reminds me of how human we all are afterall. I do feel about this man. Judging from what I have read in this article and according to my own opinion, he seems to feel the burden of his guilty conscience. But I think and feel that he is facing it with dignity, and that I respect. But I do have to add, that the only bad taste I have about this is that it involved a drug traficker !! I will pray for you Dr. Noel Arrigo.”
Who the hell paid this guy to write this?
Seriously, what the f*** is wrong with people? This man has proved that he is without integrity twice, first by accepting bribes and again by pretending he’s a holy man.
Then again, this gives us normal people immunity from any crime. All we have to do is go around with crucifixes and get priests to endorse us. (I wonder what he promised this priest).
Well said Daphne, ‘Madonna x’pajjis’, a country full of corruption.
Aren’t you all going overboard about this? A couple of priests of good standing and a former Chief Justice have testified about what THEY know about Dr. Arrigo. The fact that Arrigo made terrible mistakes – for which he should and will pay dearly- does not mean that the man is the presonification of evil, and devoid of any redeeming trait.
Moreover, who’s to say he is not genuinely contrite, and that, now that he has hit rock bottom, has not realised that he need to mend his ways? If the fact that he is a changed man helps his cause in court, why take it against him for trying to use it? Patrick Vella, by the way, also had at least one friar testifying for him in the post-verdict phase
In any case, it will not do Noel Arrigo much good; his goose is well and truly cooked. The fact that pillars of the community can speak well of him under oath may boost him (and his poor family) psychologically, and may remind the rest of us that the the man has his good side as well, but it will do precious little to mitigate the sentence.
Manuel, I think you’re missing something. When Patrick Vella was caught, he realized the magnitude of his crime and pleaded guilty. If I remember correctly, there was talk of an appeal being filed, but this was quickly dropped and from that point the man started his rehabilitation. From what I have been reading I feel that even now, Noel Arrigo does not realize the enormity of his crime. The fact that he decided to contest the charges and had his lawyers attempt to get him off by playing on the time the money was received shows that the intention was to try and get away with a slap on the wrist for the official secrets bit. The testimony of the priests would not have jarred as much if Arrigo had said mea culpa and pleaded guilty, but bringing them on when all other attempts had failed sucks.
Arrigo will probably never plead guilty. If you can’t do the time don’t the crime, I say, and he clearly thought his position would allow him to get away with it.
These “character referees” are always brought on whan all else fails and the accused hopes somebody will somehow say something which will mitigate the negative image and possibly induce the judge to shave off a few months of the sentence. Arrigo has done nothing more than practically all those who have been found guilty of serious crimes by our courts try to do. Yet, the referees’ statements do help us realise that the guilty person is no monster, but someone who does have positive facets to his character.
Arrigo took his chance, and appears to have lost heavily. We do not know whether Vella chose to plead guilty out of genuine remorse or because he knew (or was told) that the case agaisnt him was overwhelming, and he would be doing himself a favour by avoiding a drawn-out trial.
What we do know is that, once again, the mighty have fallen. Bad choices beget consequences. But I cannot find it in my heart to look at Arrigo without feeling a degree of pity along with the relief that in this case, at least, crime will not pay. There but for the grace of God…?
[Daphne – ‘There but for the grace of God go I’ applies to accidental circumstance and to those situations over which we have no control, Manuel. It does not apply to situations which are the consequence of our own depraved choices. It is not the grace of God that stops you taking bribes and consorting with criminals, but your own personal decision, for which you are wholly responsible. Your pity is provoked not so much by the man himself but by the wanton, pointless waste of it all. Yes, we’ve probably all done things of which we are deeply ashamed, but I think most of us can say that taking bribes from drug-dealers when in a position of such great responsibility is just not one of them. What’s worse is that this man obviously feels no remorse for what he has done, nor does he understand how serious his crime was. He doesn’t feel regret for the crime itself (he doesn’t even understand that it was a crime). He feels regret for the consequences of that crime which HE is experiencing. I have more compassion for Patrick Vella, who was crucified by shame, appeared to understand fully the magnitude of what he did, admitted his guilt, behaved with (ha) dignity, went to prison, served his sentence, and has been discreet ever since. Despite his social background and his schooling, Noel Arrigo has never been a gentleman. He behaved like a knave in his private and business life. He behaved like a knave as chief justice, and true to form, he was a craven knave throughout his trial. He could at least have made an effort to go down like a gentleman, but no – a knave until the end. Forget his crime, and stick to the trial: all that lying, posturing and trying to get off, like somebody raised on the street in a slum, warrants scorn and not pity, especially when you consider that he can’t blame his background. He should have handled it like Patrick Vella did, and gone down with a bit of dignity.]
And do you all think that this is the end of the story? No way. Noel Arrigo and Patrick Vella were caught. I’m sure these things happen on a regular basis.
Maybe now we need a witch-hunt to rid the court of other undesirables who have links with Freemasonery and whose private life cannot bear scrutiny.
Or are we Maltese too lily-livered for this? The more I read about this case, the more I think that Arrigo and Vella are sacrificial lambs, and that this sort of thing they did will not happen again. I’m sorry, if there is a body that needs to be scrutinized overtly and covertly, it is the judiciary. We just cannot take their integrity for granted anymore.
And that is what Noel and Patrick did to our rule of law. They have demeaned it.
@ Mario: there is only one way to get rid of the Freemasonry grip over Malta: more responsibilities to women in the public service. Freemasonry is a men-only club.
[Daphne – Bit of a Catch 22 there if you can see it: in societies other than ours, one of the reasons women couldn’t reach top positions was precisely because we can’t become Freemasons. I’m not at all convinced that Freemasonry is what gets people to the top here. Yes, I do think there’s some kind of network operating here, but with its roots in crime. mainly smuggling, counterfeit goods, the financing of drugdeals and laundering, but not Freemasonry. The obsession with Freemasonry blinds us to the real network, which is criminal but with the face of respectability.]
It is worth noting that the Code of Ethics for judges mentions sports clubs and band clubs but forgets Freemasonry.
A friend of mine who was a court marshal always tells me how certain lawyers wave their hands at the Magistrate so that he would notice the ring, not the rosary ring but the Freemasonry ring. http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41KkrdVtEuL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
The court marshal stands by the magistrate facing everyone.
[Daphne – Oh for heaven’s sake. This is like the secret handshake. If everyone knows about it, it’s not a secret. Ditto the ‘Freemasonry ring’. If somebody is waving it around in court, then it’s not a secret, so please – let’s not be so silly.]
It SHOULD not be a Catch 22 because the party in power FORBIDS its members to be Freemasons.
“And that is what Noel and Patrick did to our rule of law. They have demeaned it.”
“Noel and Patrick”? Any particular reason why you are on first-name terms with them, Mr Debono?
When a drug user is arrested for drug dealing even in a small way, very often years pass before the actual case is heard in court. In these years he might have become a reformed character but it doesn’t mean he won’t be made to pay the penalty for the original crime.
So even if Arrigo’s obsession with religion is true, it shouldn’t make any difference. So much time has passed since the PM’s announcement of the whole sorry story that I have forgotten many of the details. But did Arrigo ever say why he didn’t advise the police straight away when the infamous envelope was ‘dropped’ on his desk?
[Daphne – Not only did he not advise them, but he started spending the money to check whether it was false. And when the police commissioner called him in for interrogation, he lied to him.]
The amount involved seems so small for someone of his standing and financial background. Who was the third judge in the Appeals court?
[Daphne – Filletti, who has nothing to do with it.]
Think about it. Does one blame John Dalli for asking and getting an EU Commissioner’s appointment?
A practical way of getting an extremely well paid job, which he deserves anyway, while distancing himself from two brothers who happen to occupy the two extremes of the moral spectrum.
[Daphne – The point is, he hasn’t distanced himself. Distancing yourself has nothing to do with physical distance.]
Well done John and good luck. You are replacing an excellent former Commissioner but I am sure that you will do quite well!
“Whether Noel Arrigo has now lost himself in a career devoted to chest-beating, prayer, theology and visits to Lourdes (to cure him of what, exactly?) is totally irrelevant. That’s between him, God, and the priests of his religion.”
THAT’S RIGHT. IT’S BETWEEN him AND GOD. Certainly not for you to judge him. He has his own self made troubles, and I believe you really have some big troubles of your own. As for that lousy David S. who wrote “as for Fr Rene Camilleri, he comes from an institution which has consistently covered up for paedophile priests, rather than reporting them to the police. So why not also cover up for a corrupt chief justice?” I suggest to him to delve into himself before blabbering idiocies. If you are so pure of heart and without any blemish, just pick up the first boulder you find and try and throw it at this priest and we’ll see your face turning red. and to the magnificent Carmel, I say Madonna x’pajjiz. Meta l-puliti (sic) jipprovaw jiehdu dak li mhux taghhom bi dritt. Dik ukoll hija korruzzjoni pura.
[Daphne – This is not a theocracy, Johnny B, much as you would like it to be. His crime is not only between him and God, but also between him and the state, and between him and society too in this case.]
Suggested headline:
“Priest testifies: major condom importer in Malta has good character and values”
Sound strange and unusual to have priests defend a guy who makes money by deterring the creationist element for which sexual intercourse exists.
And for those who say this is not related to the case, if religious beliefs and trips to holy places were pulled in to try to show one side of the coin, it is only fair to also show the other side.
why do you keep on harping about him now and dragging the country with him. he’s been found guilty and that’s it. now you are only hurting his family. the defence tried to use religion in the line of defence but did not succeed.do you think these things happen only in malta. did you not follow lately the trial of the chief of police in your beloved britain
[Daphne – Honey, what you’re talking about is transference of guilt. I’m not the one who has hurt his family. He is.]
Insaqsi jien. Seta’ kien hemm xi sinjali min qabel gie mlahhaq Imhallef u wara Prim Imhallef li din il-persuna kienet diga midhla ta’ xi crieki tad-droga. Ghax jien nithasseb bil-kbir issa li seta kien il-kaz. Ilkoll niftakru l-kaz ta’ Mr. Ellul li kien inqabbad idahhal f’Malta d-droga mill-Brazil u kien qal li haseb li kienu ezmeraldi. Kien tella l-qorti jixhed favur tieghu lil Dr.Arrigo fejn dan kien tkellem favur l-akkuzat. Wara dan il-kaz l-istess persuna ma nafx kemm il darba ohra kien gie mtella’ l-qorti fuq akkuzi ohra reletati mad-droga.
Nittama li issa min pogga lill-Dr. Noel Arrigo fdik il-pozizzjoni hekk ta’ prestigju, jerfa r-responsabilta tieghu ukoll.
Ghal quddiem ghandu jinstab mezz ahjar u aktar wiesa ta kif jinhatru l-gudikanti. Nitghallmu mill-izbaji taghna u nimxu il-quddiem.
[Daphne – Il-ministru tal-gustizzja dak iz-zmien kien Joe Fenech, li miet.]
Joe Fenech dak li inqabad idahhal pakket daqshiex fuq il-kameras ta’ l-Airport mil-VIP lounge? U baqa’ jsus wara dak is-suldat li kixfu fuq il-gazzetti fil-qorti? U dak li inqeda b’huh it-tabib biex jehles lil drug courier Queroz ghax miskin kellu il-hepatite? U dak …..ahjar nieqaf hawn.
Kont nahseb Li kien L-onor. Austin Gatt. Mela allura aktar tat-thassib ghax mill-ewwel gie kaz iehor f’mohhi, ta’ Queroz.
Aktar tal-biza’ l-affari mela. Kemm ahna imsieken mela ahna c-cittadini kwalunkwe.
Joseph Mifsud darb`ohra flok tahseb hazin missek iccekjat meta lahaq.
Le hi, it was Dr Austin Gatt who appointed Dr Arrigo as chief justice, the culmination of gargantuan lack of judgement…as always.
[Daphne – And it was Joe Fenech who made him a judge. You can’t become chief justice without first being a judge.]
@ Johnny B . I do know Fr Rene personally and can’t doubt his integrity. What I find disturbing is that he is ready to give a character reference to someone just because he was chief justice. The chief justice’s behaviour is inexcusable. I would rather Fr Rene gives a character reference to il-Porporina, due to his very difficult upbringing.
@ David S: Dun Rene` Camilleri is a priest not a judge, il-Porporina was given a character reference on TV by Dun Ang Seychell.
When someone speaks to a priest, the priest has to assume that the individual who is speaking to him is telling the truth and has no hidden agenda.
The story goes that some monks called St Augustine to see a donkey on a tree branch. He ran to find out that it was a silly joke. Some other monks told him that he was a bit naive to believe that an ass ended up on a tree, his reply was that he would prefer to believe that an ass climbed a tree rather than a Christian tell him a lie.
So when one reads about such character references by priests one has to keep in mind that they would prefer to believe that a donkey went up a tree rather than the accused repentant judge was pulling their leg.
So what you are saying is that a priest’s character testimony is by default bad, as they are willfully gullible. If that is the case, why would a priest even be called to the stand?
David S, a priest never looks into one’s face. He has a mission to accomplish and that is all. He may be blue, red, yellow, porporina. All of them are his flock and his mission is to put them on the right path.
Pat as Fred Astaire is stating down here. A priest gives one the benefit of the doubt; his duty is to save one’s soul, if one says that he repents he shouldn’t doubt him. Now when a priest is called on the witness stand to give a character reference he speaks only of what he saw in the person who always behaved well in front of him.
The accused wouldn’t have asked for the priests’ evidence if he was seen by them handing rough-riders to the Theology students at the university.
People always try to behave in front of a priest let alone someone who plans to call them on the witness stand to speak about their behaviour. Dun Ang recommended il-pupa.
[Daphne – In my experience, many priests tend to prefer people who don’t behave because like everyone else they can have it up to here with suck-ups, and also because the people who don’t behave are much more amusing company.]
Daphne, thanks for your service. You really have the art of picturing situations in your writing. I admire your “bla kantunieri” attitude. As for as the priests who were, for reasons of their own, so daring to come out with statements, the contrary of which had just been been proven in court, I can only say it only served to ruin their integrity. One imagined they were made of better stuff. This also applies to any other similar commentators.
Thanks, honestly, for finding the time for your blog and opinions. Please keep it up.