Mindset?! Look who’s talking, after dedicating over 800 personal posts to John Dalli! But as you said: Your pigeon, not mine …but thanks just the same Daphne for including mine with them, and finally letting your readers knowing the FACTS. Appreciate.

“… ta’ John Dalli kien LEST, jekk ma jkunx hemm affarijiet godda, dejjem.” (MT 09/12 video (0.55″)

Now, in case you might not get the exact meaning of the word “Lest” in Maltese, according to “It-Tezawru” by Albert W. Agius : “Lest = mitmum, komplut” ! i.e. for Cassar the case is closed as far as regards Dalli. But this is not all.
CoP Cassar is consistent with what he sustained in the past about Dalli.

During his evidence in Parliament’s Privileges Committee on the 15th October 2014 Cassar revealed that he was absent when the meeting to decide on the case was convened, right after John Rizzo and his team returned from meeting Kessler in Brussels, where a witness (Johan Gabrielsson) was advised to continue to spread a lie not to disturb the investigation in Malta. But he went further.
After making it clear, that the then CoP Rizzo had yet to interrogate one last time Dalli, Cassar concluded with this precise, unequivocal declaration, which allow me to quote in Maltese, so to avoid any possibility of misunderstanding:

“Fl-opinjoni tieghi, jekk is-Sur Dalli kellu jitressaq wahdu, bil-provi li kellna ma kienx ikollna final conviction (kontra Dalli), u jiena dejjem tghallimt li jekk int konvint li mhux se jkollok final conviction, m’ghandekx tressaq il-bniedem fil-Qorti in the first place

In English this would read:
“In my opinion, had Mr Dalli been arraigned on his own, (as is the inevitable situation today). We would not have had a final convictioin (against Dalli), and I had been taught that if you are convinced that you will not have a final conviction, you should not arraign a person in Court in the first place. “

Can he be more clear than that? Yes. Read Cassar final words:

“…fil-konfront tas-Sur Dalli kien hemm biss circumstantial evidence, ma kien hemm xejn fattibbli, u b’li kien hemm, fl-opinjoni tieghi, qatt kien se ikollok a final conviction … mhux difficli, kien impossibbli li jkollok conviction.”

In English:
“There was only circumstantial evidence against Dalli, there were no facts; with what we had, in my opinion, we would never have had a final conviction … it was not just difficult, it was impossible to have a conviction.”

U conviction tfisser kundanna. So keep hoping Daphne!
One can verify all this through the Maltese Parliament archived video of the final minutes of that Committee’s sitting.

This means that then CoP Rizzo was intent to put Dalli through a judicial process knowing that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for him to have a conviction. Would not this have been gross abuse of power? I ask:
Or was THIS the reason Rizzo did not arraign Dalli when he still had time time to do this before being removed from CoP! So as to not give Dalli the chance to prove his innocence in Court
Was this the result of the political pressure from “Parliament” which Rizzo complained about?
Is this the result of the political pressure from Castille that the ‘Malta Today’ reported on the 16th December 2012?
But who thought he was to gain by the arraignment of Dalli? – Would it not have been comfortable for Barroso to get comfort for his decision to terminate Dalli (an action that is currently being scrutinised by the European Court of Justice), if it was was supported by the action of the Police in Malta?
Who would have connived on this strategy with Barroso? – Could it have been Gonzi et al in the meeting in Malta of the 5th October 2012, as Dalli sustains?
Why are you and the ‘Gonzi clique’ so blatantly obsessed to have Dalli arraigned? – Is it therefore just vindictiveness and hate, whilst trying to shift your blame, for our party’s shameful defeat at the election, on him?

Maybe you will set your army of spies to answer these questions. Or maybe not!

[Dpahne – People with your mindset are so tiring. If you want to defend a lying rogue and avaricious cheat, so right ahead. Your pigeon, not mine.]

“Conscience” does not come into the equation at all.

It is a question of “He who pays the piper calls the tune”.

We only know who should be paying the piper but it is not at all clear who is actually paying the piper using the taxpayers’ money.

Suggested reply:
Yes, weather, the Minister i/c the police and the honourable Prime Minister, permitting.

If they are not from sale of property, where did they come from?

If they came from his clients, where did they get it from? Did they issue VAT receipts? Did he? Shouldn’t he at least be questioned about money laundering?

Did HE issue VAT receipts for this money? Shouldn’t former (expelled) policeman Ivan Portelli, now Director of Operations at the VAT department be asking some questions as well?

“I believed that if we had arraigned John Dalli individually we would not have had a final conviction. There was only circumstantial evidence against Mr Dalli. It would have been a different story had the two men been arraigned together.”

So in a way these comments could be his passport to this promotion.

http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-15/local-news/PN-says-OLAF-chief-Kessler-should-be-questioned-in-Malta-government-says-it-is-useless-to-insist-6736123767

In Joseph’s world, if you fail the test of trust you’re moved back to Deputy Police Commissioner.

Now why did we think that the post of Deputy Police Commissioner is a senior position or is a position of trust? What does that say of the trust rating of the rest of the rank and file of the police force?