This is the crucial bit of information that Saviour Balzan duplicitously failed to report: HE asked to have Taliana investigated

Published: August 25, 2013 at 8:27pm

daqs dan nammetti li naqra dcg.com wara ddikjarajt bojkott

Saviour Balzan is all over the place right now, devoting his and Roger de Giorgio’s resources at Malta Today to yet another one in his long line of People On Whom He Is Thoroughly Fixated.

This time it’s Elton Taliana, the police inspector who arraigned the true culprit in a robbery when his colleagues were busy ‘framing’ somebody else (a young man who is particularly vulnerable).

In typical Saviour style, he ground his axe over almost an entire edition of his newspaper today, and carried on grinding it in his ‘video blog’ (shown here) and on his and Roger de Giorgio’s news website of the same name.

He makes it sound as though the police had evidence that Inspector Taliana set fire to Saviour Balzan’s front door seven years ago, but couldn’t get enough proof to prosecute him.

This struck me as odd and unbelievable at the outset, because Balzan’s front door was not set alight in a vacuum, but as part of a planned arson campaign targetting several people who members of racist groups saw as ‘aiding and abetting Africans’. The arson targets, all over the same couple of weeks, included the legal counsel to asylum applicants, the Jesuits and…me.

This is how I know that Inspector Taliana was not a suspect. The arsons attacks were all planned and executed by the same people, clearly, and for the same reasons. The investigating officers never mentioned Taliana to me, and nor, significantly, did Saviour Balzan when he came to our house the morning it was set alight (the house, I emphasise, and not the front door) and took notes for a newspaper article.

Yet when the investigating officers asked Saviour Balzan whether he had any suspicions as to who might have set his door alight, he responded ‘Elton Taliana’. It was HE who gave the name to the police. It was not the police who investigated and came up with the name.

This would be the equivalent of my saying, when the investigating officers asked me the same question, “That bastard, Saviour Balzan.” You know, just for kicks, or because I actually thought he might be capable of doing something like that.

The name goes down in the notes, but obviously, it means nothing.

Now what Saviour Balzan really needs to tell us, and quickly, is WHY he told the police in the first place that he thinks Inspector Elton Taliana set fire to his front door and why, seven years later, he still will not get this particular bee out of his hive-like bonnet.




5 Comments Comment

  1. curious says:

    “Irrispettivament mill-ezitu tal-Qorti se nippruvaw il-fatti.” Dangerous.

  2. Betty says:

    Whoever is capable of acting professionally should be congratulated not attacked because of personal Lanzit. Taliana showed his peers how the investigation should have been conducted to get the proper legal and just result. So it is somebody else who needs to pull up his socks including the lackey Police Commissioner.

    Saviour Balzan loses control when he comes across some incident that involves a common personal enemy, Gonzi, RCC, now Taliana. So spare your newspaper another scum campaign, Balzan. You are really becoming Gurnalista taz-Zuffjett.

  3. Simon says:

    I cannot understand why a nice man like Roger puts up with Saviour and his tantrums and obsessions.

    And can someone please tell Saviour (who has a face for radio) to stick to the written or spoken word.

    Those video blogs are dreadful.

  4. Dissident says:

    He thinks he is some kind of Marco Travaglio with this videblog

  5. Jon says:

    Saviour Balzan had published an article about the arson attacks. The article included a picture of burning tyres and hinted that Norman Lowell and/or the people around him were responsible.

Leave a Comment