Here’s the Police Commissioner’s statement about Norman Vella, verbatim
The Commissioner of Police (centre) on board the Gozo ferry last month with Labour Party master of ceremonies (now ambassador to Belgium) Ray Azzopardi and Azzopardi’s friend
A very kind and efficient reader has transcribed it from the photographs I uploaded earlier, and I found it in my inbox. It’s much easier to read this way, and allows you to see just what shocking rubbish this is.
Fil-qorti tal-Maġistrati (Malta)
Maġistrat: Dr. Marie-Ann Farrugia
Fl-Atti tar-rikors ta’ Norman
Vella għar-rilaxx ta’ oġġetti
maqbuda.
Nota tal-Kummisarju tal-Pulizija:
Illi a bażi ta ‘ informazzjoni li l-Pulizija irċeviet bdew l-investigazzjonijiet sabiex jiġi aċċertat it-twettieq o meno ta’ reat a terminu tal-Artikolu 257 tal-Kap 9, mill-imsemmi Norman Vella.
Illi fil-kors ta’ tali investigazzjoni l-Pulizija elevat u għadha qiegħda teżamina CCTV camera footage tal-Malta Internation Airport.
Illi a prima vista jidher l-istess Norman Vella f’ħin u ċirkostanzi partikolari juża apparat telefoniku b’mod li jqajjem suspett li kien qiegħed iwettaq att ta’ telekomunikazzjoni f’żona ristretta u għalhekk possibilment id-delitt predispost fl-artikolu preċitat.
Illil hija l-mansjoni tal-Pulizija li tiġbor l-evidenza kollha u għaldaqstant kien opportun li l-apparat ta’ telekomonikazzjoni appartenenti lill-istess Norman Vella jiġi miġbur sabiex isir l-analiżi meħtiġa dwar l-allegazzjonijiet u indikazzjonijiet diġa riżultanti.
Illi eżami akkurat ta’ mezz ta’ telekomunikazzjoni ma jsirx kif qed jiġi allegat li sar, iżda jsir taħt dawk il-kawtieli forensiċi neċessarji sabiex fl-ewwel lok jassigura l-awtentiċità u fit-tieni lok il-kompletezza tal-eżamijiet.
Illi r-rikors promutur huwa intavolat a terminu tal-Art 355T tal-Kap 9, liema artikolu barra li huwa kundizzjonat jagħmel enfasi dwar il-bżonn impellenti ta’ ġbir ta’ provi. Oneru unikament inkombenti fuq il-Pulizija u dan mhux biss kontra iżda wkoll u iktar importanti favur il-persuna konċernata. Kemm ‘l darba l-oġġett jiġi rilaxxat mingħajr l-eżamijiet neċessarji kull parti tibqa taħt id-dell ta’ suspett li huwa minnu innifsu kontro senso u huwa fl-oneru tal-Pulizija li tikjarifika.
Illi l-artikolu 355T mhux waħdu fuq is-suġġett ta’ rilaxx, iżda huwa akkumpanjat minn diversi Artikoli oħra u għalhekk ma jistax jittieħed in solitudni u bħala l-unika regola eżistenti, tant li immedjatament in segwitu jinsab l-Artikolu 355U fejn huwa predispost li jinżamm repertus dwar l-oġġett in kwistjoni.
Illi ġaladarba dan il-każ tqajjem quddiem din is-sede mill-istess Norman Vella jkun ħela ta’ ħin u kontradditorju li isir rikors quddiem sede differenti.
Għaldaqstant flimkien ma’ din in-risposta qiegħed isir rikors a terminu tal-istess Artikolu 355U u dan sabiex jiġi konservat il-valur probatorju tiegħu.
Għaldaqstant, filwaqt li nitlob li s-sede tikkonsidra l-Artikolu indikat mir-rikorrent fl-interità tiegħu u tieħu konjizzjoni tar-rikors adġunt, nitlob ulterjorment li t-talbiet tar-rikorent Norman Vella jiġu miċħuda fl-immedjatezza taghħom u dan sakemm isiru dawk l-eżamijiet rikjesti mill-liġi kif ukoll mitluba.
Peter Paul Zammit, Dip, BA LP
Kummissarju tal-Pulizija
42 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
“Oneru unikament inkombenti fuq il-Pulizija u dan mhux biss kontra izda wkoll u aktar importanti favur il-persuna koncernata.”
Mintoff-Gaddafi-NorthKorea-Muscat-MaltaPolice-style.
Insawtuk ghall-gid tieghek.
Reminds me of Sammy Meilak’s reasoning in his recently published book:
‘Attack on Curia in 1984 benefited faith in Malta’
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131026/local/-Attack-on-Curia-in-1984-benefited-faith-in-Malta-.491950#.UnDzkHC-qzI
What scum. The whole lot of them.
Read between the lines, I guess that would be “We’re just looking for any potential evidence and/or data Norman Vella intends to use against the Government and/or Joseph Muscat.”
Art 257 of Cap 9 states:
“If any person, who by reason of his calling, profession or office, becomes the depositary of any secret confided in him, shall, except when compelled by law to give information to a public authority, disclose such secret, he shall on conviction be liable to a fine.”
In this case, what secret are we on about? That Kurt Farrugia travelled to London?
It also talks about a fine and not court procedures.
“suspett li kien qiegħed iwettaq att ta’ telekomunikazzjoni f’żona ristretta”
Fl opinjoni tieghi din ma taghmilx sens. Jekk hija ristretta kif il passigieri jghaddu bil mobile phones, u mhemmx signs li jindikaw li ma tistax igor mobile phones jew ma taghmilx telefonati jew tircievi telefonati. Skuzani tal grammatika.
So now we know that all that Norman Vella went through and is going through is because the police believe he has breached Article 257 of Chapter 9 of the Laws of Malta.
Article 257 makes it a criminal offence to disclose professional secrets.
It has absolutely nothing to do with taking photographs of government officials in a restricted area.
So now the whole story of Vella’ criminality has been pulled inside out.
Is the Police Commissioner serious?
How does Art 257 of the Criminal Code apply? What professional secret has been disclosed?
Does the Police Commissioner realise that he is referring to an article that may entail two years imprisonment and a fine of over 45,000 euros?
Art 257 reads: “If any person, who by reason of his calling, profession or office, becomes the depositary of any secret confided in him, shall, except when compelled by law to give information to a public authority, disclose such secret, he shall on conviction be liable to a fine (multa) not exceeding forty-six thousand and five hundred and eighty-seven euro and forty-seven cents (46,587.47) or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both such fine and imprisonment.”
Why seize the tablet too, if he was only using the phone?
Of course this is a fishing expedition, and the Court should appoint court experts to ensure that NO irrelevant material to to this specific incident is viewed by the Police or anybody else, and the smartphone and tablet returned by the Court soonest possible.
Artikolu 25 tal-kap 9, under which Norman Vella is charged, refers to the ‘disclosure of a secret’.
How on earth can the departure from Luqa airport of a midget who is a well known public spectacle, accompanied by his equally recognisable and well known friend, in full view of the public, on a scheduled jam-packed Air Malta flight to Heathrow (ie not secreted in a private jet) possibly be construed to be a SECRET.
This is an illegal charge with evil intent.
What’s with this ‘Peter Paul Zammit, Dip’ ?
They’ve forgotten the stick.
Tat-twerwir.
Let us not forget that Michael Frendo was arrested and arraigned for the way he looked in the general direction of the President of the Republic, Anton Buttigieg, while delivering the traditional graduation speech.
We lived through this before. No surprises here.
I pity the up and coming younger generation. They will have to fight hard like we did. It will not be easy but eventually, once they have an inspiring leader, Malta will emerge from the darkness of oppression once again.
Good luck.
And how, exactly, was Italian removed from the courts of law?
If the police saw Mr. Vella using his mobile phone and taking a photo, why did they also confiscated his tablet?
Well it looks as if the police want to go on a fishing expedition with the sole purpose of finding an excuse to hammer Norman Vella and the threat of striking below the belt where it hurts becomes a reality.
“We never spoke to anyone in the police about this case and the first time we got to know about it as when we arrived in Heathrow,” the officials said.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131030/local/government-officials-again-deny-filing-report-about-norman-vella.492588
Fine. Who did Mr. Coconut and Mrs. Shampoo speak to then?
And who spoke to the police?
Did anyone who speak to the police mention the names of Mr. Coconut and Mrs. Shampoo because they had spoken to him/her?
If the police did not have CCTV footage showing Norman Vella taking pictures, if there is no evidence of the existence of alleged picture, and Mr. Coconut and Mrs. Shampoo did not file a report, then on what basis did the police act to arrest Mr. Vella?
Mr. Coconut and Mrs. Shampoo are denying that they spoke to the police. This makes the case worse, because we know that Mr. Silvio Scerri and the Minister of National Security, the Police, the Army and Broadcasting got in contact with the police.
PEPPI AZZOPARDI PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF WHAT’S GOING ON TO AN EX-COLLEGUE OF YOURS. WE ALL EXPECT A XARABANK PROGRAMM ON THIS SCARY MATTER.
IF THERE WON’T BE A XARABANK PROGRAMME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, THEN WE CAN FREELY SAY THAT ALL YOUR TALK ABOUT FREEDOM IS TOTAL CRAP.
How dare they take a photograph of Peter Paul Zammit, the ambassador and his friend in a restricted area on a Gozo ferry boat?
I wonder if Minister Mallia, a well known criminal defence lawyer, is now advising the prosecution.
In evidence, the Commissioner of Police is reported to have refused to say who had filed the report in consequence of which Norman Vella was arrested. He said that the law prohibits him from revealing who filed the report against Mr Vella.
Again, what law? Chapter and verse, please.
The Commissioner of Police should keep in mind that filing a report with the police against a person, is a serious matter with the most serious consequences. If that report is false, the filing is a top criminal offence. The Commissioner has the institutional duty to investigate and prosecute PUBLICLY any person who he has reason to believe has filed a false report.
The filing of a report with the police is NOT privileged information. It is NOT confidential. It is the very basis of PUBLIC criminal proceedings against who has filed it. The victim of a false report to the police has every reason to expect that PUBLIC prosecution. The law protects the victims of criminal offences – it does not shield those who have committed them.
Everywhere, except in a police state.
Is that photo legal?
My God, it’s happening, we’re on our way back to the dreaded 80s.
Pathetic.
Wow, did you see Mark Sammut latest blogpost regarding JPO?
If there were two investigating officers, why did he need to get involved in this case directly?
Stasi Police are back.
First of all, the scope of the investigation was the alleged presence of pictures taken by Mr. Vella,
The CoP statement says that such pictures could not be found on his devices.
The footage on the CCTV, then becomes irrelevant to the case since, even if Mr Vella is seen using his mobile/tablet and furthermore positioning such devices in a picture taking mode but no pictures are found, why then did the police arrest him, for ‘posing’?
There seems to be a chain of lies, by the police, and by Kurt and Ramona. It is still not clear how the name of Silvio Scerri came up and the police Inspector’s question of ‘Who is this Silvio Scerri…?’
Are the police fishing for possible other charges or simply intruding on Vella’s private life?
Are there any rules about police behaviour, regarding the collection of information off private devices without bothering to obtain a court order first?
Q: Why did the police confiscate Norman Vella’s tablet when there is no way on earth that Kurt ‘Coconut’ Farrugia could have been photographed knowing that he could not possibly have been remotely visible over the counter?
A: How on earth can Joseph Muscat collect all those tablets for Year 4 students if not by confiscating them for no reason?
Mela hekk sew! Issa min ser jikkompensa lill-Norman ta’ dan il-hassle kollu, jekk jinstab li hu bla htija?
Peppi mhux qed jitkellem ghal- siehbu issa. Daqs kemm kien jilmenta meta il-Laburisti kienu arrestawh ghal xejn.
Norman has just won the case:)
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131030/local/vella.492581#.UnFJqDK9KSM
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131030/local/vella.492581
“Magistrate: No reasonable suspicion that Norman Vella committed a crime” – timesofmalta.com
Prime Minister Joseph Muscat must now explain.
The Police Commissioner must now explain.
Manwel Mallia must now explain.
Silvio Scerri must now explain.
Kurt Farrugia and Ramona Attard must now explain.
Kurt Sansone must now explain.
From the Times:
“The police had to confirm whether or not the law was broken as this could affect Malta’s standing in the Schengen area. If the allegation proved to be incorrect then he would breathe a sigh of relief.”
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131030/local/vella.492581
This is laughable – taking photos in the passport control area may put at risk our standing in the Schengen are but selling Maltese passports to anyone who can come up with the cash is fine.
Well dictatorship, here we come. I hope all those pseudo liberals who voted for labour now see just how eroded their rights are.
Peter Paul Zammit, the politically-appointed Commissioner of Police, should resign immediately. He has managed to hit the pits in a record time, even when compared to Lorry Pullicino.
Hasn’t it crossed your mind that since here we’re speaking about a phantom picture, it might be that there are evil ghosts making reports to the police?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131030/local/vella.492581#.UnFNISh1T5E
People are being made to think that Norman Vella was the only target in this whole saga. I believe that Daphne was going to be the other victim. They tried to ‘kill’ two birds with one stone and a ton of bricks hit them all.
The Commissioner is looking more like the PL Commissioner.
Kurt and Ramona were caught telling a blatant lie.
The Prime Minister was caught telling another lie by saying that Norman was not arrested.
The Labour Party and technology were never good bedfellows. In Mintoff’s times, owning a walkie-talkie, video player or a computer was considered to be a crime and today, internet and mobile phones are showing what Malta’s ruling mob really is.
God bless our law courts for being autonomous. Norman Vella gets his equipment back.
Mr. Police Commissioner, after a mere few months in office you’ve screwed up big time. The future beckons.
Is Peppi Azzopardi’s mouth still shut?
Norman Vella and Karol Aquilina on Net.
I have a very, very strong suspicion that the Police Commisioner did not write the note presented in Court himself.
In fact I am almost certain who the guy who wrote it is.
For pretty obvious reasons.
I have absolutely no proof whatsoever to back up my suspicion.
So I will shut up.
I tremble to think how often I was in danger of being assumed to be carrying out an “… att ta’ telekomunikazzjoni f’żona ristretta u għalhekk possibilment id-delitt predispost fl-artikolu preċitat” when looking down at my mobile phone at passport control, and consequently being arrested and having my phone confiscated and retained at the pleasure of this Police Commissioner.
“An act of telecommunication” – that sounds like a heinous crime to me.