Magistrate Dr. Jacqueline Padovani Summary of Sentence

Informal Copy of Judgement
MALTA
COURT OF MAGISTRATES (MALTA)

AS A COURT OF CRIMINAL JUDICATURE
MAGISTRATE DR.
JACQUELINE PADOVANI
Sitting of the 28 th January, 2010
Number 402/2003
THE POLICE
INSPECTOR KEVIN FARRUGIA
INSPECTOR SIMON GALEA
VS
TRISTAN SCOTT HAYNES
The Court, having seen the charges brought against

Tristan Scott Haynes, British National age 34 years, born
in England on the 26th June 1968, son of Halen and
Susan Cockhill, and currently residing at 126, Fleet Street,
Gzira (Malta) holder of Passport No. 703205310.
With having on the 10th May 2003 at St. Andrews Road

Swieqi limits of Bahar ic-Caghaq at about 22.00 hours;
1. Without the intent to kill or to put the life of any

person in manifest jeopardy, caused harm of a grievous
nature on the persons of David Shephard having ID Card
No 216446M as certified by Dr. Nicola Camilleri at St.
Page 1 of 48
Courts of Justice
Lukes Hospital and Reuben Briffa having ID Card No

259373M as certified by Dr. T. Mizzi of Griza Health
Centre in breach of articles 214 and 218 of Chapter 9 of
the Laws of Malta;
2. Without the intent to kill or put the life of any person
in manifest jeopardy caused harm of a grievous nature on
the persons of Joseph Attard having ID Card No 188447M
and of a slight nature on Marianne Attard having ID Card
No 216247M both certified by Dr. W. Sawicki in breach of
articles 214, 216 and 221 of Chapter 9 of the Laws of
Malta;
3. Through imprudence, carelessness, unskilfulness in
his art or profession, or non-observance of regulations,
caused damages on motor vehicle make Ford Sierra with
registration number CAD 914 belonging to Joseph Attard
ID Card No 188447M;
4. Wilfully disturbed the public good order or the public
peace by shouting and fighting.
5. Obstructing the flow of traffic.
The Court may, where it deems it expedient, in order to

provide for the safety of individuals or for the keeping of
the public peace, in addition to, or in lieu of the
punishment applicable to the offence, require the offender
to enter into his own recognizance in a sum of money to
be fixed by the Court.
The Court may, deal with the accused to be a recidivist

after being sentenced from the Court of Appeal which has
become absolute.
Having heard the evidence on oath.
Having examined all exhibited documents and all the

record of the proceedings.
Having seen the articles listed by the Attorney General at

page 446 of the proceedings by virtue by which articles
this Court may pronounce itself as to the guilt or otherwise
of the accused.
Page 2 of 48
Courts of Justice
Having seen the note in the record of the proceedings of

the 20 July 2004 (at page 706) where the accused had no
objection to being adjudicated by this Court.
Having seen the applications of the Commissioner of

Police for the issue of a part three arrest warrant against
the accused Tristan Scott Haynes.
Having seen the consent of Attorney General for the issue

of a part three warrant in respect of the same accused.
Having seen the decrees of this Court exceeding to the

same request and the issue of an alert in the Schengen
information system with respect to the same Tristan Scott
Haynes.
Having seen all the extradition proceedings of the British

Court.
Having seen the note of the Attorney General of the 17th

April 2009 to the effect that “the crimes for which
Haynes was extradited are solely those relating to
grievous bodily harm caused to David Shaphard and
Joseph Attard.” (vide page 924)
Having seen the notes of final submissions of the

complainants of the 21st October 2009.
Having seen the notes of submissions of the accused

Tristan Scott Haynes of the 4th of November 2009.
Deliberates:
Inspector Simon Galea prosecuting officer (vide page 15

et sequitur Maltese version – page 203 the English
translation) gave evidence on oath to the effect that on the
night between the tenth (10) and the eleventh (11) May
2003, the prosecuting officer was informed by police
sergeant 1131 Justin Camilleri that two (2) persons had
been admitted to St. Luke‟s Hospital, one of them being
David Shephard who was in danger of losing his life. The
prosecuting officer stated that Reuben Briffa who
Page 3 of 48
Courts of Justice
happened to be passing from St. Andrews Road, Bahar

ic-Caghaq also filed a police report to the effect that he
was a witness to a collision between two (2) cars on that
road, that he saw a person lying down on the road and
that he stopped his car to give what assistance he could.
Briffa informed the police that as he tried to lift the person
who was lying on the road off the ground, the accused
started to hit him. Reuben Briffa informed that police that
after he had been hit in the face, that is blows directed to
his upper lip, Reuben Briffa grabbed a stone and threw it,
however he did not hit anyone. Reuben Briffa handed in a
medical certificate which indicated that his injuries were of
a grievous nature.
Police Inspector Galea informed the Court that police

sergeant 1131 carried on his investigations and found that
Joseph and Mary Attard also suffered injuries in this
incident and therefore he informed the duty Magistrate,
Magistrate Dr. Consuelo Scerri Herrera who conducted an
inquiry and appointed various experts including Dr.
Edward Zammit Louis, architect Valerio Schembri and Mr.
Cardona.
The prosecuting officer informed the Court that Mary

Shephard testified on oath as did Joseph Attard in the
inquiry. The prosecuting officer informed the Court that
Joseph Attard said that the accused had got out of his
vehicle and started to fight with Mr. Attard and that David
Shephard got out of his car and tried to intervene, to stop
the fight. The prosecuting officer stated that on the same
night Shephard, together with Mr. Attard, went on site to
try and identify the exact position of the incident and in
fact they found evidence of blood and broken glass. They
continued with the inquiry the following morning. The
prosecuting officer stated that in the mean time he had
asked for the assistance of police Inspector David Saliba
and police Inspector Jeffery Cilia from the CID in order to
conduct a search for the whereabouts of the accused.
The accused was found at three o‟clock in the morning
and was arrested. The police Inspector Galea stated that
there was divergences as to the exact place where the
collision had taken place, stating that David Shephard and
Page 4 of 48
Courts of Justice
Joseph and Mary Attard were alleging that the incident

took place at the site where the spectacles were found on
the ground whilst the girlfriend of the accused stated that
the collision had actually happened further along the road
where in fact a pair of glasses belonging to Mrs. Victoria
Mifsud (who was in the car together with the accused)
were found.
Inspector Simon Galea stated that he therefore

questioned Mr. Briffa who informed him that the collision
in fact had taken place in the vicinity of the site indicated
by Shephard and Attard.
The prosecuting officer stated at page 239 that David

Shephard and his friend Joseph Attard were driving from
Bahar ic-Caghaq towards St. Andrews.
Following the collision David Shephard said that he saw

Joseph Attard and another person fighting in the middle of
the road. He said he got out of the car and tried to break
up the fight. However the accused punched him and he
became dizzy and the accused kept on hitting him using
martial arts until he fell to the ground. At one point in time
David Shephard remembered that somebody stopped and
helped him. After that he remembered nothing else.
Inspector Simon Galea informed the Court that criminal

proceedings against Mr. Reuben Briffa and again Joseph
Attard were being instituted.
Inspector Simon Galea exhibited Doc. SG – judgement of

the Court of Appeal dated 24th March 1995.
At page 242 Inspector Simon Galea confirmed that

Reuben Briffa had suffered injuries of a grievous nature.
Asked to explain the injuries suffered by David Shephard,
Inspector Simon Galea stated that he was in a danger of
loss of life and that a medical certificate was issued by Dr.
Camilleri. With reference to Mr. Attard, Inspector Simon
Galea stated that Mr. Attard was injured badly around his
eye. In cross examination Inspector Galea confirmed that
the fight between the accused and Joseph Attard and
Page 5 of 48
Courts of Justice
David Shephard was subsequent to the collision.

Inspector Galea confirmed that he did not accompany the
accused on site during the preliminary investigations but
during the Magisterial Inquiry. The Court Expert Architect
Valerio Schembri undertook the task of drawing up the
plans of the site of the collision as given the Attards and
Shephard and as given by the accused.
The record of the proceedings conducted in the inquiry

were exhibited as Doc. MC (vide page 29). At page 31 of
the proceedings Dr. Edward Zammit Louis exhibited his
report marked as Doc. EZL at page 33 et sequitur.
Police Sergeant 1131 Justin Camilleri in the evidence at

page 70 et sequitur (which was translated into English
and is found at page 224 of the Proceedings), stated on
oath that a certain Reuben Briffa has filed a police report
on the 10th of May 2003 at around a quarter to eleven in
the evening. He stated that whilst he was driving his
vehicle in St. Andrews Road towards the direction of
Paceville, he realised that the road ahead was in fact
completely blocked by two (2) cars. Briffa also told the
police sergeant that he also realised that a fight had
broken up between some men.
Police Sergeant Camilleri testified that Briffa told him that

he stepped down from the car to try and assist a man who
was lying in the middle of the street and as he was
assisting this man, another man, probably of English
nationality, approached him and assaulted him. Police
Sergeant Camilleri informed the Court the Reuben Briffa
had given him a medical certificate regarding his injuries.
Briffa also added that there were other persons who were
injured in this incident who had been admitted into
hospital. Police Sergeant Camilleri informed the Court that
he immediately went to Casualty Unit at St. Luke‟s
hospital were he found that three (3) other persons, that
is: Mr. Joseph Attard, his wife Mary Attard and David
Shephard were also suffering from injuries sustained
during this incident.
Page 6 of 48
Courts of Justice
PS Camilleri stated that he spoke to Dr. Nicole Camilleri

who informed him that David Shephard was in danger of
dying. Police sergeant informed the Court that Reuben
Briffa had given the registration number of the vehicle that
was being used by the person who assaulted him and the
police had therefore been able to trace this to the
accused. The Police Sergeant Camilleri informed that
Court that Briffa in fact had suffered grievous injuries in
this incident as certified by Dr. T. Mizzi at Gzira Health
Centre.
Police Sergeant Camilleri testified that he had also

spoken to Joseph Attard and Mary Attard whose faces
were injured. Their medical certificates were marked and
exhibited as Doc. PS 1, PS 2 and PS 3 whilst the police
report was being marked and exhibited as Doc. PS 4.
Dr. Sawicki Wojgdek, doctor on duty at the casualty

department of St. Luke‟s Hospital, confirmed that on the
night of the 10th May 2003 he examined Marianne and
Joseph Attard and confirmed the certificated exhibited and
marked as Doc. PS 2 and PS 3. He stated that Marianne
Attard was found to be suffering from a couple of bruises
on her face and that Joseph Attard had a bruise on his
face and a lacerated wound on his left eyebrow which
needed to be sutured. The injuries were classified as
slight save complications.
Dr. Nicole Camilleri at page 86, a medical doctor at St.

Luke‟s Hospital Casualty Department stated that she was
on duty on the night of the 10th of May 2003 and that she
had examined David Shephard who was semi-conscious.
Dr. Nicole Camilleri stated that after being subjected to a
CT Scan it resulted that David Shephard had suffered a
contusion of the brain and a fracture of the eighth rib. The
patient was in danger of in loss of life for a couple of hours
however he regained consciousness thereafter. Dr.
Nicole Camilleri exhibited Doc. NS at page 94, a medical
certificate of David Shephard.
Joseph Attard gave evidence at page 95 in the Maltese

language which was translated in English and may be
Page 7 of 48
Courts of Justice
found at page 248 at the record of the proceedings.

Joseph Attard stated on oath, that on the night in
question, which was a Saturday evening at around nine to
nine fifteen, he was driving his car at St. Andrews Road
when he decided to overtake the car in front of him. He
flicked the light and tried to overtake this car and after a
few seconds the car in front of him braked. However
nothing happened and both cars kept on driving. Joseph
Attard stated that after some time he again decided to
overtake this car so he flicked his lights again and tried to
overtake it. He said he felt a bump on his side and he
reduced his speed. The car in front of him overtook him
on the inner lane (on the left hand side) and stopped in
front of him (vide page 252). The driver of the car ahead
of him, came out of the car and Joseph Attard also got out
of the car. Joseph Attard told the driver of the car in front
that he had two (2) disabled persons in his car, however
the driver who was identified as the accused, did not listen
to him and started to hit him. At page 255 Joseph Attard
stated that he had addressed the accused in Maltese.
Joseph Attard stated that the accused punched him at
least three (3) times on the left side of his face near his
eye. (vide page 255). Joseph Attard stated that following
this, he lost consciousness for a few moments and fell on
the bonnet of his car. In fact the bonnet had three (3)
dents and there was also damage on the right mudguard
and on the left side. Joseph Attard stated that he tried to
get away from the accused and went to the back of the
vehicle. After this he was hit twice by the accused. He
remembered his face was covered in blood and that he
had seen his friend lying across the road. Mr. Attard
stated that the accused was moving like a boxer and that
he was inviting him to fight. Joseph Attard stated that the
accused had punched him several times. Joseph Attard
also stated that David Shephard had stepped down from
the car to try to intervene and stop the fight. He had tried
to support Attard and then tried to stop the accused.
However Attard did not see how David Shephard got
injured. All that he remembers was that he saw David
Shephard lying on the floor. Attard saw another person
who had stopped his car to try and help David Shephard
as there were cars were passing very close to where he
Page 8 of 48
Courts of Justice
was lying on the road. The person who stopped to help

David Shephard was also assaulted by the accused.
He stated that, in the mean time David Shephard‟s wife

remained in the car, trying to calm down her sister Pauline
Ciantar, who suffers from downs syndrome as she was
terrified and was crying. As David Shephard came out of
the car to try and stop the fight, followed by Mary Attard
(Joseph‟s Attard wife). Joseph Attard also stated that the
accused also hit his wife. Joseph Attard stated that this
might have been done accidentally because he did not
see it happen. He was only told about this by his wife
after the incident. Joseph Attard stated that he sustained
injuries to his face and that his injuries needed one (1)
suture. (vide page 262). Joseph Attard exhibited a
medical certificate marked as Doc. JA and two (2)
photographs marked as Doc. JA 1 and Doc. JA 2. Joseph
Attard stated on oath that he remembered hearing a voice
of a girl shouting “stop it” for three (3) consecutive times
and that this voice was coming from the direction of the
car which had been used by the accused. Joseph Attard
denies having hooting unnecessarily before he made the
overtaking manoeuvre. He denied making any obscene
gestures in the direction of the accused and he simply
stated that he overtook in a prudent manner. He stated at
page 65 that the accused came directly over to him and
he did not say anything to him before he assaulted him.
Joseph Attard confirmed that he accompanied the police
on the site where the collision had taken place to try and
identify the exact location of the collision. Joseph Attard
could only confirmed the location of the collision as a
result of the discovery of the broken glasses of Mary
Attard on site.
In cross examination Joseph Attard stated that he was

driving a Ford Sierra which had four (4) doors, however
one of the back doors had a child lock to protect Pauline
Ciantar who suffered from downs syndrome. Joseph
Attard stated that David Shephard was sitting at the back
near the door which did not have the child lock. He
confirmed that traffic was congested on that day as it was
Mother‟s Day. Joseph Attard stated that he had tried to
Page 9 of 48
Courts of Justice
overtake the accused and in fact flicked his lights however

the accused braked suddenly and therefore he did not
overtake him. He stated that there was a double
continuous white line and that when he tried to overtake
him the second time he flicked his lights, did not use his
indicator and when there was no on coming traffic, he
overtook the accused. Joseph Attard stated that did not
believed he crossed the double continuous white line.
(page 272 – 273) As he was overtaking, Joseph Attard
stated that he felt a bump but he could not say whether he
had hit the car of the accused or whether the car of the
accused hit his car. Joseph Attard explained at page 287
that the collision was more in the sense of a car brushing
against another one rather than crashing into each other.
At page 282 Joseph Attard again reiterated that he was
not sure whether he hit the accused or whether the
accused hit his car. Joseph Attard stated that as he was
slowing down, the accused overtook his car from the inner
lane and stopped in front of him. Joseph Attard stated that
the accused got out of his car first and that he then
followed him by getting out of his car.
Joseph Attard stated that he tried to explain to the

accused that he had two (2) disabled persons in his car,
however the accused immediately assaulted him and did
not give him an opportunity to utter another word. Joseph
Attard denied that he immediately grabbed the accused
by the neck and attacked him. He said that David
Shephard did not get out of the car with him. In fact
Joseph Attard stated that David Shephard suffers from
epilepsy and should not become agitated and that he had
told David Shephard to remain in the car and that he was
going to sort the matter on his own. (vide page 286).
Joseph Attard stated that when he went out of the car, he
was just gesticulating like a normal person. Joseph Attard
denied again that he grab the accused by the neck.
Joseph Attard at page 289 denies that he blamed the
accused for the incident because he did not exactly know
how the collision occurred. Mr. Attard repeated that he
had addressed the accused in Maltese and that he had no
reason to be angry about the incident that is the collision.
Joseph Attard stated that it was the accused who was
Page 10 of 48
Courts of Justice
angry about the incident and in fact he had address Mary

Shephard with obscene language. (vide page 292). Mr.
Attard tried to defend himself when the accused was
hitting him but even though he tried hitting him, he
believed that he may have only hit him once. (vide page
294). Joseph Attard stated that he saw Mr. Shephard
lying on the ground and he only noticed this, as he was
trying to escape the accused by running behind the car.
He confirmed that he did not see the accused hitting
David Shephard at any time. Mr. Attard stated that he
was hit again by the accused after he discovered Mr.
Shephard lying on the ground. He stated that he could
not see very well because he was bleeding from his
wounds and the blood was seeping into his eyes blurring
his vision.
At page 298 Mr. Attard has stated that it was the accused
who left the site of the collision first and after that, Mr.
Attard got into the car and drove off into the direction of
St. Luke‟s Hospital. He stated that David Shephard was
unconscious at the back of the car and he knew he had a
cut on his head. As they were proceeding in the tunnel of
Regional Road, he accidentally met the accused on the
road, however he was afraid to overtake him. He hooted
his horn, however the accused drove in the middle of the
road even though he knew that there was an emergency,
since Joseph Attard had the hazard lights on and was
hooting the horn. When he arrived in hospital he told the
policeman on duty what had happened. Joseph Attard
stated that in the car that was being used by the accused,
there was an elderly woman with a walking stick and a
girl. Joseph Attard denied that he started this incident, he
denied getting out of his car and assaulting the accused.
At pages 303 – 312, Joseph Attard confirmed the
evidence he gave during the inquiry.
Mary Anne Attard at page 313 confirmed the evidence of

her husband Joseph Attard, that is the application of the
brakes by her husband Joseph Attard before the
overtaking manuvere, the subsequent overtaking
manoeuvre and the collision. She stated that following the
collision there was a car which was stationary in front of
Page 11 of 48
Courts of Justice
them, an English man emerged from it and approached

their car. It was at this stage that her husband Joseph
Attard got out of the car. Mary Anne Attard stated that
she heard Mary Shephard utter the words: “he is going to
kill him, he is hurting him, he is hitting him,” after which
she asked David Shephard to go and assist her husband.
Mary Anne Attard stated that she was sitting in the rear
seat of the car. After David Shephard left the car, she got
out of the car to assist her husband and she heard David
Shephard tell the English man to “leave my friend alone.”
Thereupon the accused punched him.
Maryanne Attard stated that it was at this moment that

she asked the English man to leave him alone after which
the accused punched her on her left eye. Maryanne
Attard recognised and identified the accused present in
this Court Room as the person who assaulted her.
Maryanne Attard at page 318 stated that the accused
kicked David Shephard on Shephard‟s left side in the
region of his ribs and he did this a second time
whereupon David Shephard fell down to the ground. After
this, the accused assaulted Joseph Attard whilst Attard
was trying to run away from him by circling the car. The
accused grabbed him and slammed him down on the
bonnet.
Maryanne Attard stated that at this point in time she tried

to push the accused away from her husband and she
heard a woman cry out to the accused “stop it, stop it” and
this came from the direction of the car that the accused
was using. Maryanne Attard stated that in the car of the
accused there was also an elderly lady with a walking
stick. (vide page 321) Maryanne Attard stated that when
the vehicles stopped behind each other, the vehicle of
Joseph Attard was on the inner lane and that when David
Shephard fell to the ground he fell on the left rear side of
Joseph Attard‟s car. She stated that cars were passing
very close to where David Shephard laid on the ground
and she was afraid that he was going to get run over.
At one point in time a certain Mr. Briffa came to help them.

However, she did not see the accused hit Mr. Briffa since
Page 12 of 48
Courts of Justice
she was concentrating on David Shephard as the cars

were passing very close to where he laid. Maryanne
Attard stated at page 324 that when she was in hospital
she realised that she had lost her glasses and these were
found when they were accompanied by the police on site
during the Inquiry with the Court Experts. Maryanne Attard
confirmed the evidence that she gave during the inquiry.
Maryanne Attard said that when Joseph Attard was
driving to hospital after the incident, the accused was
driving right in front of them, driving in the middle of the
road. Her husband Joseph Attard started to beep the
horn, however the accused kept obstructing their line of
traffic. He also made an obscene gesture in their regard.
(vide page 330)
Mary Shephard at page 332, wife of David Shephard

confirmed that she was in the car which was being driven
by Joseph Attard. Following the collision Mary Shephard
stated that Joseph Attard went out of the car with the
intention of explaining to the accused what had happened.
She reiterated that the accused immediately punched
Joseph Attard. (vide page 335) Mary Shephard stated
that after the first punch Joseph Attard collapsed. After
that the accused threw him down on the bonnet and hit
him in his eyes and face. Mary Shephard stated that she
did not move because fear paralyses her. She said that
her sister Pauline, who suffers from Downs Syndrome had
started to cry. Mary Shephard stated that David
Shephard approached the accused and Mary Attard also
intervened, however the accused hit David Shephard who
fell to the ground. At this stage she tried to get out of the
car to assist her husband David Shephard who suffers
from epilepsy and she remembers addressing the
accused to inform him that her husband suffered form
epilepsy and that the accused responded with obscene
language. (vide page 337)
Mary Shephard stated that she tried to lift her husband

because the cars were passing very close to were he laid
on the ground and she was afraid that he could be run
over. She stated that at one point in time she saw
Mr.Briffa who was also bleeding, however she did not see
Page 13 of 48
Courts of Justice
how Mr. Briffa got hurt. After this, they all got into the car
and Mr. Joseph Attard drove to hospital. On the way there
the accused was driving ahead of them and tried to block
their way and made obscene gestures in their regard (vide
page 339). Mary Shephard stated that when Reuben
Briffa tried to help David Shephard, he told the accused to
leave him alone because he was an old man and that a
fight ensued.
At page 345 Mary Shephard confirmed the evidence that

she had given in the inquiry. In the inquiry Mary Shephard
stated that she had not seen the manner in which Reuben
Briffa had got hurt, but that she was told after the incident
that the accused had assaulted him and his teeth were
knocked off (vide page 347).
Reuben Briffa at page 350 stated that on the day in

question, he was driving in his car when he noticed two
(2) stationary cars in front of him, a man on the floor and
cars passing very close to where this man was lying so he
decided to go down and give assistance. As he helped his
man to get to his feet, another man approached him and
Briffa told him “leave him, he is old.” Briffa stated that the
accused answered with obscene language and punched
him in his teeth. Briffa ran towards the pavement, found a
stone with which he tried to defend himself. Briffa
identified the accused as being the man who assaulted
him. As a consequence Briffa stated that he lost two (2)
front teeth and that his dentist Dr.De Gray, issued a
certificate. The medical certificate by Dr.De Gray was
exhibited and marked as Doc. RB. (vide page 356)
Reuben Briffa stated that David Shephard was lying on

the ground near the front passenger seat and that he was
unconscious. He stated that as he was helping David
Shephard, the accused approached David Shephard “to
keep on hitting him.” (vide page 358) It was at this point
that Reuben Briffa addressed the accused with the words
“leave him poor man, because he is old.” (vide page 358)
Reuben Briffa stated that he saw another man by the
name of Attard who was also hurt, his eyes were blooded
and he was holding his face with his hands. Reuben
Page 14 of 48
Courts of Justice
Briffa stated that he did not see any injuries on the

accused who was acting like “a boxer on a ring, hopping
like as if he was challenging you.” (vide page 359)
Reuben Briffa confirmed that he did not at any time

assault the accused in any way. Reuben Briffa confirmed
that he showed the police and the Court experts where he
believed the collision had taken place. Reuben Briffa
confirmed the evidence that he gave in the inquiry and the
police report that he made at the police station.
At page 375 Francis Rodenas gave evidence as regards

the bail proceedings.
At page 391 architect Valerio Schembri exhibited Doc.

VS. At page 394 a report together with the annexed plans
and confirmed that authenticity of the said report.
Victoria Mifsud at page 414 gave evidence in Maltese and

the translated testimony can be found at page 465 et
sequitur. Victoria Mifsud stated that it was her seventy
fourth (74) birthday and that the accused and her grand
daughter Ramona had taken her out to dinner at a
Chinese restaurant in Bugibba. (vide evidence at page
465A) As they were heading slowly in traffic, Victoria
Mifsud heard and felt two (2) bumps which were not
strong and the accused who was driving the car stopped
to see what had happened and noticed that the car had
been hit. Victoria Mifsud stated that the accused got out
of the car and approached the other car and that all she
knows was that she heard screaming and that Ramona
got out of the car. Victoria Mifsud stated that she did not
leave the car because she could not remove her seat belt.
At page 469 Victoria Mifsud stated that she did not hear
anything. Later on in the evidence, she said “cars going
by and I was waving in order to try and stop them.
Prosecution: Why did they have to stop them? Victoria
Mifsud: Because I could hear them fighting.”
At page 470 Victoria Misfud stated that when she finally

managed to extricate herself from the seatbelt, she got
out of the car. However there was a lady dressed in black
Page 15 of 48
Courts of Justice
who told her that everything was over and to get inside
the car. She said that at this stage the accused and
Ramona got into the car and she saw the other car rush
past. (vide page 470) Victoria Mifsud stated that Tristan
was scratched all over and that Ramona also was
bruised. “Somebody threw her on the bonnet, they
pushed her.” (vide testimony at page 471) Victoria
Mifsud also stated that she saw “a stone passing over us,
the size of a small loaf of bread.” (vide page 471)
However she was not in a position to state who had
thrown this stone. At page 472 Mifsud stated that this
stone had been thrown in Tristan‟s direction by somebody
who was wearing a red shirt. However she was not sure
of this. Victoria Mifsud stated that the accused was a
good man and that he “even medicates my wounds.”
(vide page 474). At page 475 Victoria Mifsud confirmed
the evidence that she gave in the inquiry wherein she had
stated that she had not been a witness to the fight
because she could not remove her seatbelt and that when
she finally managed to do this, the fight was completely
over.
In cross examination she stated that immediately following

the collision, the accused got out of the car. However he
did not appear to be aggressive. She also confirmed (at
page 477) that she heard a lot of voices and that Tristan
was speaking in English however the others were
speaking in Maltese. Victoria Mifsud stated that she did
not notice the car of the complainants after the incident
and neither did she see the accused make any obscene
gestures.
Ramona Rodenas gave evidence at page 425. The

translated testimony lies at page 483 et sequitur.
Ramona Rodenas stated that she was the accused
girlfriend of four (4) years and that on the date in question,
it was Mother‟s day and the accused had taken her out
together with her mother and her aunt. Ramona Rodenas
stated that whilst they were on the Coast Road at Bahar
ic-Caghaq, a car overtook them “he tried to scare us off
the road . . . it seems that this person tried to bump into
us on purpose” (vide testimony at page 485) and that a
Page 16 of 48
Courts of Justice
collision ensued. She stated that the damages of the

accused were, on the right hand side of the car, in the
front between the mudguard and the bumper. She stated
that there was no pique between the drivers, however she
does remember that the breaks were used and however
there was no horn blowing or any verbal communication
between the drivers. She stated that she was sitting
behind the driver, the accused and that following the
collision the accused got out of the car to check what had
happened. “And exactly when he started to walk towards
their side, I got out after him. They were fighting Tristan
and somebody else.”
At page 488 Ramona Rodenas stated that by the time she

had got out of the car, “they were already fighting Tristan
and the person of the other car.” (vide testimony at page
488) Whilst the accused and the driver of the other car
were fighting, another lady got out of the car and she tried
to stop the fight together with the witness (Ramona
Rodenas). At this point in time, another man came out of
the car “and there was a confusion, they were two (2)
against one (1) at that time.” Ramona Rodenas stated that
the women were trying to stop the fight and to calm down
the situation. At page 489, Ramona Rodenas stated that
she saw a man lying on the ground, however the accused
was not near him. She said that when the man collapsed
on the ground, the situation calmed down a bit. After this a
car stopped and a man came out and approached the
man who was lying on the ground. “And he started
shouting and screaming like a mad person and I do not
know what he was saying to Tristan. There was a tree
and he got this stone; and when I say a stone, it is a big
stone. God forbid it had hit anyone. And basically he told
us: I will throw this stone at you. And the threw it.” (vide
testimony at page 489 and 490). However no one was hit.
Ramona Rodenas (at page 491) was not in a position to
say how the man lying on the ground collapsed and that
at this point in time, the accused was on the other side of
the car. Ramona Rodenas stated (at page 492) that the
car of the complainants was close to the continuous white
line and that the accused car was much more to the left.
She stated that another car had stopped and a man with
Page 17 of 48
Courts of Justice
glasses came out of the car whom they had never seen
before. He was furious and acted like a mad man. At
page 497 Ramona Rodenas confirmed that everybody
seemed to have been injured “there was blood on
everyone.” This man used foul language (vide page 500).
Ramona Rodenas (at page 500) confirms the evidence
that she had given in the inquiry. At page 503 Ramona
Rodenas in the evidence given during the inquiry stated
that there was no name calling or obscene gestures
during the incident and that she did not report anything to
the police “because we felt we were right and we did not
register the vehicle’s registration number.”
At page 504 Ramona Rodenas denied that the accused

was versed in martial arts or that he attended classes in
these Arts. She denied that he had any certificates or
diplomas in this discipline. She stated that the accused is
a very careful driver. Ramona Rodenas stated that she
was trying to block the driver of the other car‟s way so that
he would stop attacking the accused (vide testimony at
page 508). At page 510 Ramona Rodenas denied that
she assaulted anyone. She also denied that Victoria
Mifsud assaulted anyone. At page 511 she stated that the
accused Tristan was only defending himself. She stated
that when they got home, the accused had “a bite here
and he was punched.” Asked about the injuries suffered
by the other persons involved in this fight, Ramona
Rodenas (at page 512), states that she was aware that
one (1) of the men had four (4) fractured ribs. Asked
whether she saw the accused kicking anybody, Ramona
Rodenas stated “not that I know of.” (vide testimony at
page 513)
Dr. Robert De Gray at page 448 confirmed the certificate

exhibited (at page 194) in the record of the proceedings
as his own. He stated that Mr.Reuben Briffa had lost his
right central incisor and that his lateral incisor was very
loose and had to be pulled out, (vide page 448) and that
his injury was compatible with blunt trauma. He classified
the injuries as grievous at page 449 and that the cost of
dental replacement of the teeth would be LM 260.
Page 18 of 48
Courts of Justice
PC 453 Brian Cassar at page 451 exhibited his report

Doc. SA at page 453 et sequitur.
Anthony Felice at page 523, a panel beater confirmed the

estimated damages sustained on car CAD 914 and that
is to the tune of 65 Maltese Liri (vide Doc. X - at page
532). He stated that the damages sustained were on the
bonnet of the car and the side and that the dents were
rather small.
David Shephard gave evidence in Maltese at page 535 et
sequitur and the translated evidence lies at page 552 et
sequitur. David Shephard stated that on the date in
question his friend Joseph Attard was driving along the
Bahar ic-Caghaq Road, Attard overtook another car and
the other car crashed into him and parked in front of him
(vide testimony at page 533). David Shephard stated that
Joseph Attard got out of his car when he saw the other
driver approaching him whilst he went out to look at the
damages that the other car sustained. “And all of a
sudden I saw him (the accused), like Bruce Lee, the
movements of Bruce Lee, kung fu hitting, boom, boom,
boom, boom. I saw my friend like a skinned rabbit. Blood,
his face could not be seen. I told him: stop hitting him. He
turned on me and did the same to me. Kung fu
movements. He gave me two (2) blows in the head, he
made me dizzy. He turned suddenly, he raised his legs
and kicked me in my chest. Some three (3) kicks. He hit
me everywhere.” (vide testimony at page 553 and 554)
David Shephard stated that he lost consciousness and

that he only regained consciousness when he was in
hospital. He stated that he had fractured ribs and internal
injuries in the groin and in the abdomen. David Shephard
stated that he was sitting on the rear seat of the car
because he suffers from epilepsy. He also stated that his
wife Mary Shephard, her sister Pauline Ciantar and
Joseph Attard‟s wife was also in the car. David Shephard
said at page 557 that when he got out of the car, Joseph
Attard was sprawled on the bonnet of his own car and that
his face was covered in blood. David Shephard stated
that he told the accused to stop hitting his friend and that
was when the accused turned onto him.
Page 19 of 48
Courts of Justice
In cross examination David Shephard stated that they had

been travelling from Birzebbuga on the Coast Road and
that Joseph Attard was driving. At page 563 et sequitur
David Shephard confirmed that they were proceeding on
the Coast Road and that Joseph Attard was behind the
car driven by the accused by about fourteen (14) feet. He
stated that when Joseph Attard decided to overtake, he
switched on the indicator and pulled on the right hand side
to overtake. David Shephard at page 556 denied that
Joseph Attard had to break hard at any moment prior to
the overtaking manuvere. He confirmed that the accused
stopped his car and that Joseph Attard also stopped the
car to see the damages, if any on his car.He said that the
accused overtook them again and stopped the car in front
of them.
David Shephard denied that when Joseph Attard got out

of his car he was in an aggressive mood. At page 574
Shephard stated that he got out of the car to hear what
was being said, however when he approached Joseph
Attard, he found him covered in blood. He addressed the
accused and told him “leave my friend, stop hitting him.”
That was when the accused turned on to him. David
Shephard (at page 577) stated that when he got out of the
car and walked towards the bonnet of the same car, he
found that Joseph Attard was already sprawled on the
bonnet and covered in blood. David Shephard stated that
he did not see how the fight started (vide page 578).
David Shephard (at page 579) denied that he insulted the

accused in any manner. Asked about the third person who
arrived on the scene of the incident, David Shephard
stated that by this time he was already unconscious.
Brian Farrugia at page 586 on behalf of the director of

traffic, confirmed that the car IMP 099 Fiat Punto grey was
registered in the name of Ramona Rodenas identity card
number 24477M and that the car CAD 914 Ford Sierra
white was registered in the name of Joseph Attard identity
card number 188447M. He exhibited Doc. BF at page 588
and 589.
Page 20 of 48
Courts of Justice
Tania Briffa at page 593 gave evidence in Maltese and

the translated testimony lies at page 654 et sequitur. She
stated that she was driving with her husband Reuben
Briffa together with her father, her sister and three (3)
children in Bahaq ic-Caghaq where she saw two (2)
stationary cars and a man lying on the floor. She said that
her husband and father went out of the car to give
assistance to this man. She said that as they were giving
assistance to the man, she saw two (2) other men fighting
each other, and that all of a sudden her husband got hit
in the mouth. Tania Briffa stated that it was the accused
who hit her husband Reuben who had gone to assist the
man who was sprawled on the floor.
Tania Briffa stated that she remained in the car at all
times and that she realised that her husband‟s face was
covered in blood as her husband was approaching the car
after the incident. Thereafter they went to the Gzira
policlinic. Tania Briffa said that she never saw a stone in
her husband‟s hands and neither did she see him
gesticulating or shaking his fists at anyone. Tania Briffa at
page 671 stated that she had never seen any of the
persons involved in the incident before in her life.
Saviour Briffa gave evidence in Maltese (at page 608 and

the translated testimony lies at page 634 et sequitur).
Saviour Briffa stated that he was in the company of his
two (2) children Mariella and Reuben and their children
along the Coast Road, when Reuben, who was driving,
saw two (2) stationary cars and some people fighting.
Reuben also saw an old man who was lying unconscious
on the floor and decided to stop the car to help him.
Saviour Briffa stated that when his son Reuben decided to
assist the elderly gentleman, he also got out of the car to
assist. He stated that when Reuben picked this man from
the ground, an English man approached him, grabbed him
from the neck, punched him, as a result of which, Reuben
Briffa lost two (2) teeth. Saviour Briffa stated that he did
not see or hear his son address the English man before
this had happened and neither was he gesticulating.
Page 21 of 48
Courts of Justice
Saviour Briffa stated that the only thing that he heard was
a woman crying out the words “stop it, stop it.” (vide
testimony at page 640) Saviour Briffa confirmed that he
had never seen any of the people involved in this fight
before in his life. Saviour Briffa stated that his son
Reuben Briffa did not come to the aid of the man who had
collapsed on the ground because he had recognised him.
He simply wished to assist him. Saviour Briffa stated that
after his son Reuben Briffa was injured, he took him to the
police station and to the policlinic. Regarding the “stone”
that Reuben Briffa allegedly threw in the direction of the
accused, Saviour Briffa stated that this was not a stone
but a clump of soil. He stated that the clump of soil that
was thrown landed two (2) or three (3) meters away from
the accused. Saviour Briffa stated that there were
another two (2) ladies who were running about and crying
and that there was another man who was also covered in
blood. Saviour Briffa stated that after the English man
had hit his son Reuben and after Reuben had thrown the
clump of soil, the English man left and got into his car.
Saviour Briffa (at page 648 and 649) denied that the
accused punched Reuben Briffa after he threw the clump
of soil.
Mariella Briffa gave testimony in Maltese (at page 630 and

the translated testimony lies at page 674 er sequitur).
Mariella Briffa, daughter of Saviour Briffa and sister to
Reuben Briffa confirmed the evidence of Reuben Briffa
and Saviour Briffa, identified the accused as the person
who assaulted her brother Reuben Briffa. She stated that
before the accused hit her brother, she had seen him
going around the car after another man and hitting.
Mariella Briffa stated that when the accused hit Reuben
Briffa, he broke two (2) of his teeth. She stated that her
brother Reuben Briffa had only approached the man who
was lying on the floor in an effort to pick him up and put
him near his car. She denied seeing Reuben Briffa
throwing anything in anybody‟s direction. Mariella Briffa
denied that Reuben Briffa was gesticulating and waving
his hands about.
Page 22 of 48
Courts of Justice
Dr. Marilyn Casha (at page 606) confirmed that Mr. David
Shephard was admitted to the High Dependency Unit at
St. Luke‟s Hospital and that before he gave evidence
before the Court Expert Dr.Zammit Louis, she had
informed him of David Shephard‟s condition as a patient
and that he was competent to give evidence. Dr. Marilyn
Casha confirmed the testimony she gave during the
inquiry.
Robert Cardona (at page 618) exhibited Doc. XRC that is

a report regarding the blood swabs taken from the scene
of the incident.
Professor Godfrey Laferla, Chairman of the Department of

Surgery at St. Luke‟s Hospital, at page 687 testified that
David Shephard was admitted via the casualty
department on the tenth (10) of May two thousand and
three (2003) at 22.26 hours. He said that David Shephard
was conscious when he was admitted in the casualty
department and said that he was allegedly involved in a
fight. He said that he was injured at the back of his head,
that he was hit hard on the left flank and was complaining
of gastro pain and a headache. David Shephard was
nauseous and further investigation resulted in a small
contusion on the left side of his head, however this did not
cause a shift of the brain. However a scan of the
abdomen showed that Briffa was bleeding internally and
there was a fear that his spleen had been ruptured.
Further investigation confirmed bleeding within the spleen,
however there was no rupture. The injuries were classified
as grievous and life threatening. Professor Laferla
confirmed that the injuries sustained by David Shephard
were compatible with those sustained in a fight or from a
fall.
Dr. Tania Mizzi at page 692 confirmed Doc. PS 1 at page

74 and confirmed the referral of Reuben Briffa to a dentist.
Inspector Pio Pisani at page 693 confirmed the judgement

Police vs. Tristan Haynes (at page 21 of the proceedings).
He confirmed that he was the prosecuting officer in that
case and confirmed the identity of Mr. Haynes.
Page 23 of 48
Courts of Justice
PS 36 Sergio Azzopardi (at page 694) confirmed Doc. SA,

his report, and confirmed that he was a scene of crime
officer appointed at the incident.
The accused tendered as evidence (at page 721 et

sequitur) an stated that he was thirty six (36) years old
and that he had been living in Malta, though not
continuously, for a period of about ten (10) years. He said
he was married and separated and have a nine (9) month
old baby from a relationship with his girlfriend Ramona
Rodenas. He stated that on the day in question, he had
taken out his girlfriend‟s grandmother out for supper as it
was also Mother‟s Day and they had gone through
Bugibba for a Chinese meal. Rodenas‟s grandmother was
an elderly who suffered from diabetes and had limited
mobility. As they were travelling in Rodenas car with the
accused driving on the Coast Road near the Splash and
Fun park, the car in front of him braked and therefore the
accused did likewise and he noticed that the car behind
him has screeched to a halt and had skidded. They
proceeded towards St. Julians in the line of traffic as it
was rather congested being Mother‟s Day. As they
reached the White Rocks Holiday Complex, the accused
observed that the car behind him overtook him and as it
was doing this overtaking maneuver, it bumped into the
front right side of his car.
The accused stated (at page 726 and 727) that he

believed that the driver of the other car had actually
crossed the double white lines to do the overtaking
maneuver. At page 727 the accused stated that he
stopped his car immediately and that Mr. Attard also
stopped behind his car “behind my car about fifteen (15)
or twenty (20) meters,” (vide page 727) both drivers
having gone out of their cars to examine the damage on
their respective cars. The accused stated that on this part
of the road there were no street lights and it was dark, the
only light available being their own headlamps and the
headlamps of the cars in on-coming traffic. At page 728
the accused stated that he only suffered slight damages
to his car. After that, “we walked towards Mr.Attard who
Page 24 of 48
Courts of Justice
was walking in my direction”. At page 729 the accused

stated that Mr.Attard, the driver of the car that crashed
into him, “was making a noise and with his hands in the
air like he was screaming and things like this.” The
accused stated (vide page 730) that he asked Mr. Attard
what he was shouting about and that Mr.Attard responded
by grabbing him around the neck and pulled him down.
He stated that he managed to push his face away
thereupon Mr. Attard bit his finger and punched him in the
face. In the mean time, Ramona had got out of the car but
her grandmother was still in the car.
The accused stated that a man and a woman also got out
of Mr. Attard‟s car and started to fight with him, and that
he now knows them to be Mr. Shephard and Mrs. Attard.
The accused (at page 731 stated) that Mr. Shephard and
Mrs.Attard were on his back hitting him from behind. He
said that Ramona tried to intervene and break up the fight.
The accused stated that Mr. Attard was punching him so
he punched him back. The accused stated that after that
the fight just stopped and it was calm with Ramona and
Mrs. Attard pushing back the men to stop them fighting.
The accused added that Mrs. Attard told him that the
police were on the way and that he should go into his car
and that is what he did. However he realised that
Ramona was still outside the car, so he went back for her,
when another men “another big man, very big man was
shouting, screaming his head off, coming into my
direction.” (vide testimony at page 732) The accused
stated that his man was “swearing his head off” and acting
“completely crazy.” Thereafter accused responded using
foul language. This third man picked up a rock and told
him that he was going to smash his face and that he was
going to kill him. “He tried to put the rock into my head.”
(vide page 732) The accused stated that he heard
Ramona screaming “stop it, stop it” and that he punched
this man in his mouth and that he did this almost
automatically because he was frozen with fear. He stated
that at this point in time, he saw a man, who he later
recognised as Mr. Shephard, lying on the ground next to
his car. The accused stated “he did not fit into the picture
of everything, he just, he did not make sense who this
Page 25 of 48
Courts of Justice
man that was lying there, like whether he was involved in

another fight, there or what was happening, it just did not
come into the picture. It doesn’t make sense what this
man was doing there.” (vide testimony at page 733) The
accused stated that Mrs. Attard kept on pushing him back
and telling him that the police were on their way and that
this was when he got into the car and left. The accused
stated that in the meantime the traffic was still moving,
with cars passing from the inner side of the stationary
cars. The accused stated that he was six (6) feet tall, but
weighed only sixty nine (69) kilos, was extremely thin and
not very healthy. The accused stated that Mrs. Attard was
trying to push him back towards in the direction of his car
whilst Ramona was trying to restrain Mr.Attard from
attacking him again. The accused stated that the fight
happened in front of Mr. Attard‟s car. The accused stated
that after the incident with Mr.Briffa was over, they went
into the car and drove into the direction of St. Julians. The
accused stated that when they got to the traffic lights near
St. Julians, he noticed a car that was driving extremely
fast with the hazard lights on, that he thought that it was
the police at first, however after that he believed that
perhaps there were more men coming to fight with him, so
when he reached the tunnels, he turned left towards the
building that housed the Independent Newspaper.
However this car continued on the main road. It was at
this point in time, that he noticed that his necklace was
missing and this necklace had sentimental value so they
turned back to the site of the collision. He found his
necklace and returned home.
Mr. Scott Haynes (at page 737) stated that he did not file
a police report because he had not written down the
number plate of the other vehicle. The accused stated that
he intended to talk to Ramona‟s uncle who was a police
sergeant the next morning, however when they got home,
Ramona‟s father phoned up and informed them that the
accused was being asked to go to the police station. The
accused stated that he went to the police station between
two o‟clock and three o‟clock in the morning and that he
was taken to the policlinic where a doctor attended to his
injuries. At page 740 the accused stated that he had
Page 26 of 48
Courts of Justice
abrasions around his neck and back. The accused stated

(at page 742) that he did not know how Mr. Shephard got
injured. He added that the police were alleging that Briffa
was in danger of dying and that he (the accused) was
responsible for that.
In re-examination the accused denied that Mr. Attard‟s car

was ever in front of his during this incident. He also stated
that is was incorrect to state that two (2) cars could safely
drive on the Coast Road without crossing the double white
line because the width of the road does not permit this. At
page 743 however, he said that at the site of the collision,
two (2) cars could actually pass because of the width of
the road; that however the traffic was heavy and all the
cars were driving in the middle of the carriage way, so
that, in that sense, overtaking without crossing the double
white lines was impossible. The accused stated that he
was the only man with the group of persons travelling in
his vehicle and that, there were Mr. Attard and Mr.
Shephard with their respective wives in the other vehicle
apart from Reuben Briffa.
Mr. Scott Haynes denied that Mr.Shephard collapsed after

he (the accused) attacked him (vide page 755). Asked
how Mr.Attard sustained his injuries, the accused said that
he did not know, however Mr.Attard himself had stated
that he fell on the bonnet of his car not as a result of the
blows that the accused dealt him, but because of the fact
that Mr.Attard was physically attacking him the whole time
(vide page 755 - 756). The accused stated that with
regards to Mr. Reuben Briffa, this man just approached
him shouting, screaming and swearing and that the
accused responded by using foul language, at which point
in time Reuben Briffa picked up a large stone and
threatened to kill him. At page 758 the accused was
asked whether he was afraid and he felt himself in danger
at any point in time, the accused responded in the
affirmative at the time when Reuben Briffa approached
him with the rock in his hand and threatened to kill him.
However, later on, the accused stated that he was also
afraid when he was attacked by Mr. Attard and the others.
In fact he stated that he was both shocked and scared
Page 27 of 48
Courts of Justice
(vide page 759). The accused also stated that he

windsurfs and swims. Asked whether he practiced martial
arts, the accused (at page 759) stated: “no, I do not
practice any martial arts, no I do not practice any martial
arts.” However asked whether he ever participated in
martial arts, the accused replied in the affirmative and
stated that this is a discipline “in doing karates which is
like a dance movement.” (vide page 759). At page 760
however the accused admitted that he had reached a
black belt level in martial arts. Asked by the Court how
Mr. Shephard was injured, the accused (at page 761)
replied that he did not know. Asked again by the Court,
the accused said that before Mr. Reuben Briffa came on
the scene there was no other man involved in the fight
except for Mr. Attard and Mr. Shephard. The accused
stated that he had a medical certificate regarding his own
injuries which consisted of a scratch on the top of his
hand which did not require any suturing and some
scratches on his back. He confirmed that he had no black
eyes and no broken bones.
At page 763 the accused stated that he could have

elbowed Mr. Shephard when Mr. Shephard was hanging
on to his back. The accused stated that he had a
sedantery job and was not physically a strong person. The
accused stated (at page 766 and 767) that he had three
(3) children to support and that they were in a difficult
financial position.
Dr. Brian Flores Martin (at page 777) exhibited an affidavit

together with a copy of the certificate relating to the
accused‟s injuries and gave testimony in English at page
778. He stated that when he examined the accused he
found him fully conscious and cooperative. He had
bruises on the nape of his neck, a small scratch over the
bridge of his nose and scratches over his right knuckles
and bruising over the lower abdomen. He had a small cut
at the left hand small finger and that these injuries were
classified as being injuries of a slight nature. He
confirmed the certificate exhibited at page 777. Dr. Flores
denied that he gave the accused a tetanus injection.
Page 28 of 48
Courts of Justice
At page 929, Architect Joseph Bugeja stated that he went

on the site of the incident and he could confirm that cycle
lanes were marked out in the relevant road and that there
was only one (1) continuous line in the middle of this road.
He stated that his findings were made on the first (1) of
May two thousand and nine (2009). He also exhibited
XJB1, 2 and 3 which are plans drawn to scale and a
survey map together with three (3) images. He reiterated
that the width of the road was between thirteen (13)
meters and thirteen point five (13.5) meters in all.
Architect David Vassallo gave his evidence in Maltese at

page 958 and the translation lies at page 962. Architect
Vassallo confirmed that he was an architect with the
Network Infrastructure Directorate at that ADT and that he
confirmed that the cycle lanes indicated to him on the
Coast Road, precisely in the site marked out (at page
410) of the Architect‟s Schembri report in fact were laid
down in the year two thousand and six (2006) but he was
unable to give a precise date.
Architect Audrey Testaferrata De Noto gave evidence in

Maltese at page 967 and the translated testimony lies at
page 972. She confirmed that she was an Architect
working with the Transport Authority and that the cycle
lanes marked out in Route A1, that is, the site shown at
page 410 in Architect Valerio Schembri‟s report, where in
fact laid down in two thousand and six (2006), however
she could not inform the Court as to the precise date
when the lanes were established. She stated that this
route always had a continuous white line in the centre
dividing the two (2) carriage ways. She confirmed that the
road had always had one (1) lane on two carriage ways
and that when they decided to establish the cycle lanes,
they left the markings of one (1) lane per carriage way as
it had originally been planned. Architect Testaferrate De
Noto confirmed (at page 979) that there was only one (1)
continuous line and not a double continuous line dividing
the carriage way on Route A1 because a double
continuous line presupposed that each carriage way had
a double lane which was not the case. In this case each
carriage way had only one (1) lane. She confirmed that
Page 29 of 48
Courts of Justice
each carriage way had to be no narrower than 3.4 meters

and that the carriage way in this particular site in Route
A1 was 6.2 meters wide per carriage way.
Marianne Attard (at page 992) produced by the Defence,

gave testimony in Maltese (at page 992 et seq., translated
versions stands at page 1164) she stated that prior to the
overtaking maneuver, the accused had braked and that
her husband had stopped the car. When he was
overtaking, Marianne Attard felt an impact and stopped
the car. She confirmed that the accused also stopped the
car ahead of Joseph Attard. Marianne Attard stated that
she could not really describe the overtaking maneuver
executed by her husband as she was in the middle of the
rear seat. When the maneuver was happening, she felt
the car vibrate or shake slightly and her husband stopped
the car (vide page 1169 and 1170) She did not know
whether her husband had switched on the indicator prior
to the overtaking maneuver. At page 1177, Marianne
Attard did not know who was at fault in the collision that
ensued, following the overtaking maneuver. She stated
that after her husband, Joseph Attard, left the car, she
heard Mary Sheperd say words to the effect that
Maryanne Attard should get out of the car because, “He is
going to kill him.” (vide page 1181) and therefore she got
out of the car, following Mr. David Shephard, to help her
husband. She confirmed that Mr. David Shephard
addressed the accused with words to the effect that he
should leave his friend alone, that he walked towards the
accused who was standing in front of their car. Mr. David
Shephard was a couple of feet away from the accused, in
front of the bonnet of their car. Asked to verify the exact
position of the accused and whether Marianne Attard and
David Shephard were standing behind the accused,
Marianne Attard stated (at page 1191) that the accused
was looking at Mr. Attard. However she was most
uncertain. At page 1193 and 1194, Marianne Attard said
that the accused was looking in their direction, at page
1196 that she put her hand on the accused‟s arms and
asked him “Why are you doing this?”. At page 1199,
Marianne Attard said that her husband held the accused
so that he would not approach his car and told him in
Page 30 of 48
Courts of Justice
Maltese that they had a handicapped woman in the car.

She said that she addressed the accused in Maltese
because they did not know, at the time, that he was
English. At page 1202, Marianne Attard stated that no one
held the accused and that she only held his arm
momentarily to ask him why he was doing this. She said
that her husband did not hold the accused because he
was badly injured and bleeding from wounds to his head.
Marianne Attard said that when she asked the accused (at
page 1204) why he was doing this, the accused elbowed
her, hitting her on the side of her head. Marianne Attard,
confirmed (at page 1206) that the accused kicked Mr.
Shephard and threw him on the floor and that whilst this
was happening, Mr. Attard moved to the side of the car. At
page 1208, Marianne Attard stated that her husband
remained in the same place near the car and that the
accused kicked Mr. Shephard when the latter had only
told him to leave his friend alone. She added that when
Mr. Shephard collapsed on the floor, the accused kicked
him twice. Marianne Attard (at page 1212) stated that Mr.
Shephard collapsed near the back passenger seat.
Marianne Attard (at page 1213 and 1214) stated that the
accused appeared to be dancing as he was hitting the
man. At page 1216 to 1218, Marianne stated that the
accused had already hit her husband before she got out
of the car and that when she was out of the car the
accused threw her husband on the bonnet of the car.
Marianne Attard (at page 1222) stated that she suffered a
bruise on her left eye and on her forehead. She stated (at
page 1223) that the bruising first occurred on her
forehead and then settled on her left eye. At page 1225 till
1227 Marianne Attard stated that even though she was
still afraid, she attempted to stop the accused in view of
her husband‟s injuries and as well on those of Mr.
Shephard. At page 1229, Marianne Shephard stated that
the accused went back to his car own his own accord and
she remembered telling the accused that the Police were
on their way. At page 1232, Marianne Attard stated that
when she was elbowed by the accused and was hit on her
forehead she did not feel dizzy and remained up-standing.
Marianne Attard (at page 1234 and 1235) did not
Page 31 of 48
Courts of Justice
remember whether she was standing in front of the

accused‟s car at any time.
Mary Shephard (at page 1236), produced by the Defense,

tendered her evidence, in Maltese (at page 1014 – the
translated version being at page 1236 et. seq.) confirmed
that Joseph Attard was driving towards St. Julians, the
coast road, and that he overtook the accused in the
normal fashion (vide 1238) i.e. from the outer lane. She
stated that the cars were following each other. After the
overtaking maneuver, the accused overtook Joseph
Attard from the inner lane “at full speed” (page 1241) and
stopped in front of them. Even though she heard the
others saying that they felt an impact, Mary Shephard said
that she did not feel anything. She said that Mr. Attard
saw the accused get out of his car and approaching them
and therefore Mr. Attard got out of his car. Mrs.Shephard
stated that the accused did not allow Mr.Attard to talk to
him and hit him repeatedly with his fist and raised his legs.
Mrs. Shephard stated that she saw Mr. Attard bleeding
and that the accused was using martial arts (vide page
1246). At page 1249, Mary Shephard stated that she froze
and could not get out of the car because of her sister‟s
medical condition. She added that she saw the accused
throw Mr. Attard on the bonnet and hit him again. Mary
Shephard stated that she had exclaimed that the accused
was going to kill Joseph Attard and that, after that, her
husband David Shephard and Marianne Attard got out of
the car. She stated that the accused was looking towards
David Shephard and Marianne Attard whilst Mr. Attard
was on the bonnet (vide page 1253). She said (at page
1258) that the accused hit Mrs. Attard with his hand and
fist and that he attacked her husband with his legs. She
confirmed that David Shephard had his ribs broken as a
result of the aggression. After Mary Shephard‟s testimony
in the inquiry was read out to her, Mary Shephard still
confirmed that she saw the accused hitting Marianne
Attard with his fist. Mary Shephard did not know how
many kicks her husband received from the accused, she
said that even after her husband collapsed on the floor,
the accused continued kicking him (vide page 1263 and
1264). Mary Shepahard stated that at this point in time
Page 32 of 48
Courts of Justice
Marianne Attard told the accused that the Police were on

their way and that the accused went towards his car. She
stated that when Marianne Attard asked the accused why
he was acting in that manner, the accused addressed her
in obscene language (vide page 1269). She said that they
tried to get David Shephard inside the car and that a
certain Reuben Briffa stopped to assist them. She
confirmed that she did not previously know Mr. Briffa and
that Briffa tried to talk to the accused, however the
accused assaulted him and hit him on the mouth and
teeth. She confirmed (at page 1274) that her husband had
collapsed on the left hand side of the car, nearer to the
back passenger‟s seat.
Joseph Attard (at page 1062 – translated version lies at

page 1071) stated that he did not know the reason why
the accused had applied the brakes prior to the overtaking
maneuver. He stated that he was in no hurry and that he
had been driving for over forty (40) years. He confirmed
(at page 1073 and 1074) that he stepped out of the car to
see what happened as one normally does in a car
accident. He said that he did not check his car and that he
was not angry following the collision. He stated that he
was three (3) steps away from his car when the accused
met him. Attard confirmed that after he received the first
punch he ended up sprawled on the bonnet of his car but
that the accused kept hitting him even though he tried to
escape from his clutches. He said that there were dents
on the bonnet and the mudguard of his car and that these
dents were the results of his head bashing against them.
He said that he would have received more blows, had not
David Shephard intervened to stop the fight. He stated
that the fight between the accused and himself lasted for
about one and a half minutes. He stated that he heard a
lady‟s voice crying out, “Stop it,” that after Mr. Briffa came
to Mr. Shephard‟s aid, the accused stopped running after
him (Attard) and that at this moment in time he was not
near the accused. Joseph Attard stated (at page 1083 and
1084) that when the accused went out of his car he did
not touch him or assault him. Asked whether he had
grabbed the accused by the neck and had bitten his finger
and punched on the nose, Joseph Attard stated that he
Page 33 of 48
Courts of Justice
was only trying to escape from the accused, does not

remember either punching or biting the accused but that
he could have bitten his finger.
David Shepard (at page 1091 translation in Maltese – the

translated version at page 1104 et. seq.) stated that he
did not remember on which side of Mr. Attard‟s scar
sustained damage, as he was being assaulted. He stated
that he did not know who was to blame for the collision
(vide page 1106). Mr.David Shephard stated that he had
been standing outside the car, for a couple of minutes,
examining the damages of the car, when he realized that
Mr. Attard was being beaten up. He remembers telling the
accused to leave Attard alone and thereafter the accused
assaulted him. Mr.Shephard did not remember who else
was outside of the car, but confirmed that he did not lay a
hand on the accused. He said that he remembered that
the accused hit him on his face and that he raised his legs
“like kung-fu fighters”, that he received several punches to
his chest beside being kicked. At page 1116, David
Shephard did not remember how many kicks were
inflicted on his chest, tummy, ribs and groin. He
remembered that he collapsed and fell to the floor. He did
not remember on which side of the car he collapsed. He
stated that, following his injuries, he had to have dental
treatement on five (5) teeth and that he suffered the
effects of the beating for an entire year following the
incident (vide page 1121). He said that his teeth became
loose and started to ache two (2) months after the
incident.
Deliberates:
Following the extradition proceedings, this Court may only

take cognisance of the first and second charge brought
against the accused and that these two charges were
further limited to the alleged grevious bodily harm to David
Shephard and Joseph Attard.
The examination of evidence, matters relatively to the

credibility of witnesses shall therefore be focused on and
Page 34 of 48
Courts of Justice
limited to the said limited charges. The Court therefore

shall refrain from entering into the merits of who was to
blame for the collision or examine the exact location of the
collision, the question of the presence of a single or
double continuous white line or cycle lanes of the coast
road at Bahar ic-Caghaq, or evaluate the charges relating
to the injuries allegedely sustained by Marianne Attard
and Reuben Briffa. All such matters and charges stand in
abeyance until such time, if ever, that the accused
submits volontarily to the jurisdiction of these Courts in the
future.
The evidence in this case and the evaluation of the

credibility or otherwise of the witnesses are crucial, since
the complainants are alleging a case of uncontrolled road
rage practiced on two elderly men, whilst the accused
cites that he was acting purely in self defence.
Article 637 of the Criminal Code, that is, Chapter 9 of the

Laws of Malta, lays down the guiding principles in matters
relating to the credibility of witnesses:
“Any objection from any of the causes

referred to in articles 630, 633 and 636, shall affect only
the credibility of the witness, as to which the decision shall
lie in the discretion of those who have to judge of the
facts, regard being had to the demeanour, conduct, and
character of the witness, to the probability, consistency,
and other features of his statement, to the corroboration
which may be forthcoming from other testimony, and to all
the circumstances of the case.”
The testimony of Joseph Attard, a tempo vergine, before

the Court-appointed Expert Dr. Zammit Louise is perhaps
the most incisive. At page 41, he states that following the
collision, he saw the accused get out of his car and walk
over in his direction. Attard stepped out of the car and
addressed him stating he should not have effected that
manoeuvre in view of the fact that two of his passengers
were disabled. The accused responded by punching him
on his left eye and whilst Attard tried to avoid further
blows by waving his arms about, but the accused threw
Page 35 of 48
Courts of Justice
him on the bonnet of Attard‟s car and kept hitting him.

Attard tried to escape from the accused by moving around
the car but to no avail (vide page 41)
Joseph Attard‟s evidence (at page 255 et seq.) is

consistent with the above, however more detailed, in that
Attard stated that he was punched three (3) times on left
side of his face and left eye before he collapsed on the
bonnet of his car; that the accused was moving like a
boxer, challenging him to fight. At page 41 and at page
260, Joseph Attard confirms that he did not see how
David Shephard was injured but he saw him lying
unconcious on the ground. He confirmed this in cross
examination at page 295. At page 1071 et seq., Joseph
Attard stated that after the accused punched him, he
ended up sprawled on the bonnet of his car whilst the
accused kept on hitting him even as he tried to run away
from him.
The above simply do not, in any way, equate with the six
(6) versions (vide note of final submissions of the accused
at page 1143) that the defence alleges Joseph Attard
gave nor are the six (6) „versions‟ given by the defence in
the note of submissions at page 1145, necessarily
different versions. Joseph Attard stated repeatedly, albeit
in different words and expressions, that after the first
assault, he tried to escape from the accused by moving
around the car, that he did not see the assault on David
Shephard but saw him lying on the ground; that after this,
the accused caught up with him and assaulted him again.
The Court cannot, in any way, uphold that the different

“versions” given by Attard give rise to any of the
“situations” mentioned at page 1143 (bottom marked
number 1) and page 1144 and this for several
reasons.With regard to “situation 1”, the defence claims
that Joseph Attard says that the accused approached him
with a clenched fist and that therefore he could not also
say he might have bitten his finger. This Court finds that
the defence conveniently selects these instances and
seems to forget that Attard says he was punched several
times (after seeing the clenched fist), that he tried waving
Page 36 of 48
Courts of Justice
his hand about to defend himself, that he did not

remember biting the accused‟s finger but that it might
have happened as he was defending himself.
Similarly, “situation 2” (page 1144) is a hypothesis of how

the dents may have occurred but the Court has no expert
evidence on the tactile strength of the metal of a Ford
Sierra nor was the Court presented with expert opinion by
a physicist who explored the force required to create such
dents.
The Court furthermore fails to see any “situation” with

regards to paragraph 3 and 4 of pages 1144 of the note of
submissions of the accused. The evidence tendered by
Attard shows that he was never floored, but that he was
repeatedly punched and ended up sprawled on the
bonnet of his car. After landing on the bonnet of his car he
lost conciousness for a few seconds. However before
landing on the bonnet of his car and after receiving the
first blow, Attard tried to defend himself.
Similarly the Court does not find anything peculiar in the

fact that Mr. Attard‟s momentary loss of consciousness,
did not result in his collapse. Evidently, the width of the
Ford Sierra bonnet was sufficient to support the weight of
Joseph Attard
The Court refers the matter of dents on the bonnet of the

Sierra to its pronouncement with regard to lack of expert
evidence on this issue.
Moreover, with regard to question two (at page 1142), the

Court refers the defence to the report of the serologist
Robert Cardona and the seven blood swabs taken from
various sections of the Ford Sierra CAD 914 (vide page
621 to 629).
As to the third question posed by the defence in its note of

final submissions (at page 1144), again the Court fails to
see what question is being posed. The evidence shows
that Attard testified that David Shephard and his wife
Page 37 of 48
Courts of Justice
Marianne Attard came out of the Sierra to support Attard

and intervened in an effort to stop the fight.
David Shephard tried “to hold” (as in stop) the accused.

Attard repeatedly stated that he never saw the accused
hitting his wife. Attard rementions hearing Shephard
saying words to the effect that the accused should leave
his friend alone. Joseph Attard states that he lost
consciousness for a few seconds. This may be the
reason for his not having seen the assault on his wife and
Shephard; and the reason why his wife, the Briffas and
David Shephard failed to notice Attard‟s transiant loss of
consciousness.
The evidence tendered by David Shephard at the inquiry

(at page 48) is to the effect that he got out of his car, after
Attard, because Marianne Attard told him that a fight had
ensued and he went to try and break up the fight.
However in his testimony (at page 552) Shephard states
that he followed Attard out of the car to see the damages
to the car when all of a sudden he saw the accused
attacking Attard viciously. He then told the accused to
stop hitting his friend and it was at this stage that the
accused assaulted him, hitting him twice on the head and
then kicking him in kung-fu style in his chest, abdomen
and groin, after which he lost consciousness, only
regained it in hospital. Shephard stated that by the time
he reached the front of the vehicle, Joseph Attard was
covered in blood and sprawled on the bonnet of his own
car. Shephard stated that he did not see how the fight
between the accused and Shephard started. In his last
testimony Shephard confirmed that he did not lay a hand
on the accused and that he was hit in the head, received
several punches to the chest and was kicked (like kung-fu
fighters) in the chest, abdomen, ribs and groin until he
collapsed on the ground.
The Court finds that the testimony of David Shephard

does not provide the four versions mentioned at page
1150 in the note of submissions of the accused, the only
Page 38 of 48
Courts of Justice
minor inconsistency being the stage at which Shephard

got out of his car – i.e. whether he went out to see the
damages sustained by the cars, or whether he got out of
the car following Marianne Attard‟s alert that the accused
was fighting with Mr.Attard.
The accused gave his testimony in the Inquiry (at page

46) stating that Attard was the first to get out of his car
and that he grabbed him from the neck, bit his finger and
punched his face, and whilst a second man “was on his
back” (page 46), a third man joined the fray:-
“the three of them were all on me. I was defending

myself and I hit them in the process of doing so.”
In his testimony (at page 727), the accused said that

following the collision he immediately stopped his car and
got out to inspect the damages to his car which were
slight, whilst Attard was walking towards him screaming,
shouting and gesticulating (page 729). The accused
asked him what he was shouting about and was
immediately grabbed by the neck and pulled down. Whilst
the accused was attempting to push his face away, Attard
bit his finger and punched him in the face. Another man
and woman assaulted him (page 730) whilst his girlfriend
tried to break up the fight. He said: “I was punching back
and I was trying to get the people off my back and I was
punching with Mr. Attard who was punching me as well.”
After that, “The fight just stopped, it was very calm.” (page
731) Mrs. Attard and Ramona managed to stop the fight
with Mrs. Attard stating that the Police were on their way
(page 731). As he was entering the car, he noticed that
Ramona was still behind so he turned back, when a “very
big man” came screaming and swearing at him. This man
got hold of a large stone and told the accused that he was
going to kill him and “tried to put the rock into my head”
(page 732) whereupon the accused punched this man in
the mouth.
The accused stated (at page 734) that he was six (6) feet
tall. At page 720, Mr. Shephard declared that he was five
Page 39 of 48
Courts of Justice
feet eight inches (5‟8”) tall, Attard five feet ten inches
(5‟10”), five feet eleven inches (5‟11”) tall.
In spite of Victoria Mifsud‟s colorful testimony, the Court

notes that, a tempo vergine, during the Inquiry, Mifsud
stated that following the collision, the accused and
Ramona Rodenas got out of the car, she heard a lot of
shouting and that by the time she had managed to release
herself from the seat belt, the fight was over (vide page
44).
In the Inquiry (at page 45) Ramona Rodenas stated that

following the collision, the accused got out of his car and
walked towards Attard‟s car. A lot of shouting ensued and
another man got out of Attard‟s car. Ramona Rodenas
therefore got out of the accused‟s car to calm down the
situation but she did not succeed because the two of them
started to punch each other. A woman tried to hold the
accused while Ramona tried to hold the other man. In the
meantime another car stopped and a man went near a
person who was lying on the floor. This man and the
accused started challenging one another. After this the
former took hold of a stone and threw it at the accused but
did not hit him. Thereupon the accused punched him.
In her testimony before this Court, Ramona Rodenas

stated that following the collision, the accused walked
towards the other car and she went out:
“after him. They were fighting Tristan and somebody
else.”
Ramona stated that she saw a man lying down on the

ground but that the accused was not near him.
Subsequently another car stopped and a mad man
approached Tristan, grabbed a big stone, threatened him
with it and, in fact, threw it. She stated that the accused
was not proficient in martial arts and denied he had
diplomas or certificates relating to this discipline.
Deliberates:
Page 40 of 48
Courts of Justice
The version proffered by the accused at the inquiry is to

the effect that, following the collision, Attard, for no
apparent reason, grabbed him in a head lock, bit his finger
and punched him whilst Shephard was on his back and a
third man was also assaulting him and that he defended
himself by punching back his aggressors.
This differs totally from the version given by the accused

before this Court, where Attard, acting like a lunatic, was
the aggressor, aided by Mrs.Attard who was clinging to
his back whilst Shephard apparently collapsed for no
reason other then, presumably, an ill-timed epileptic fit. In
the version given before this Court, the third man, Briffa,
appeared after the fight had broken up and that, acting
like a complete lunatic and, for no apparent reason, Briffa
threatened the accused with, and actually threw a stone at
his head; the accused responding by punched him in the
face.
The Court finds that both versions differ utterly from that
given by Rodenas in the Inquiry: wherein she said that
initially the accused was fighting with two men.
Furthermore both versions differ from the evidence given
by Rodenas before this Court wherein she stated that
“they were fighting Tristan and somebody else”. The Court
notes that Rodenas was echoing the accused‟s version of
events as given by him in the Inquiry. Rodenas, however,
later on, in her testimony before this Court, confirms that
Mr.Shephard was already lying down on the ground and
nowhere near the accused. She adds that yet another
mad man stopped his car, threatened and, actually, threw
a stone at the accused for no apparent reason.
These versions are devoid of credibility and have no

semblance of the truth, apart from the fact that they are
uncorroborated by indipendent witnesses i.e. the Briffas -
who were simply passers-by who stopped their car to
assist an unconscious man who was in danger of being
run over by oncoming traffic. The Court makes reference
to the compelling, mature and presice testimony of
Saviour Briffa whose evidence completely negates the
assertions made by the accused that he was assaulted,
Page 41 of 48
Courts of Justice
simultaneously, by three men. Saviour Briffa asserts that it

was the accused‟s assault that injured Attard and Briffa.
The Court notes that Ramona Rodenas, who was

proficient in both the English and the Maltese language
and who immediately realized that the complainants were
not English speaking, had cried out, “Stop it” repeatedly.
The Court believes that these words were addressed to
the accused.
Indeed, the Court, fails to see how the accused –

allegedly set upon by three men, two of whom were
lunatics, could have emerged from such a visious assault,
with a few scratches to his back and on his knuckles, and
a small cut (not a bite mark – vide certificate of Dr. Flores
Martin) on his little finger.
The Court finds that the version of events, given by the

accused and his girlfriend Rodenas, not only lacks
credibility but are highly improbable and simply do not
bear up. These versions are contradicted by all the
complainants and most importantly by independent
witnesses on fact of vital importance. The Court,
therefore concludes that the versions given by David
Shephard and Joseph Attard, with a few exceptions on
matters of mere detail, are credibile and dependable.
The plea of self defence:
According to Article 223 of the Criminal Code; “No offence

is committed when a homicide or a bodily harm is ordered
or permitted by Law or by a lawful authority or is imposed
by actual necessity, either in lawful self-defence or in the
lawful defence of another person.”
According to Maltese Jurisprudence, the plea of self

defence may be successfully in terms of Article 223 if the
accused proves on a balance of probability, that his acts
were “imposed by actual necessity” of self-defence:
“Kemm fid-dottrina, kif ukoll fil-gurisprudenza taghna,

hu ormai stabbilit li biex wiehed jista’ jinvoka din l-
Page 42 of 48
Courts of Justice
iskriminanti, l-agressjoni subita trid tkun ingusta,

gravi u inevitabbli. L-element ta’ inevitabilita’ jigi
nieqes meta wiehed, minflok ma jevita l-inkwiet ossia
l-glied li jara gej meta dan jista’ b’mod ragonevoli jigi
hekk evitat, imur minghajr raguni valida jikkonfrontah,
b’mod li jipprecipita hu stess il-konfront fiziku.” (vide
Pulizija vs. Augusto Auguliaro App. Krim. decided on
the 26th of August, 1998 per Chief Justice Dr. Vincent De
Gaetano.)
Indeed Lord Justice Wiagery in R. vs. Julien 1969 1 WLR

839 states:
“It is not ... the Law that a person

threatened must take to his heels and run in the
dramatic way suggested by Mr. McHale; but what is
necessary is that he should demonstrate that he is
prepared to temporise and disengage and perhaps to
make some physical withdrawal and that that is
necessary as a feature of the justification of self
defence is true, in our opinion, whether the charge is
a homicide charge or something less serious.” (at
page 843)
It is this Court‟s considerate opinion, that the accused not

only failed utterly to demonstrate any, if not “some
physical withdrawal” but that as a black belt practitioner of
a martial arts discipline, he engaged two elderly men, one
significantly smaller than him in stature, in an uncontrolled
display of his art of fighting.
It is pertinent to note that the accused tried to conceal his

black belt achievement from the Court. Indeed after
having denied it repeatedly (a denial which was also
echoed by his girlfriend Ramona Rodenas) the accused
was cornered into admitting that he was indeed so well
versed in a fighting art that he was a black belt. It is
universally understood that one of the cardinal principles
of martial arts is the ability to extricate oneself from a
Page 43 of 48
Courts of Justice
perceived danger without inflicting harm to oneself and to

others.
The Court, therefore, rejects the plea of self defence

proffered by the accused.
The Court must necessarily pass on to examine the extent

of the injuries sustained by Attard and Shephard in the
light of Article 214, 216 and 218 of the Criminal Code:
Article 214: “Whosoever, without intent to kill or to

put the life of any person in manifest jeopardy, shall cause
harm to the body or health of another person, or shall
cause to such other person a mental derangement, shall
be guilty of bodily harm.”
Article 216 (1): “A bodily harm is deemed to be grievous

and is punishable with imprisonment for a term from three
months to three years –
(a) if it can give rise to danger of –
(i) loss of life; or
(ii) any permanent debility of the
health or permanent functional debility of any organ of the
body; or
(iii) any permanent defect in any
part of the physical structure of the body; or
(iv) any permanent mental
infirmity;
(b) if it causes any deformity or
disfigurement in the face, neck,or either of the hands of
the person injured;
(c) if it is caused by any wound which
penetrates into one of the cavities of the body, without
producing any of the effects mentioned in article 218;
(d) if it causes any mental or physical
infirmity lasting for a period of thirty days or more; or if the
party injured is incapacitated, for a like period, from
attending to his occupation;
(e) if, being committed on a woman
with child, it hastens delivery.”
(2): “Where the person injured shall have recovered
without ever having been, during the illness, in actual
Page 44 of 48
Courts of Justice
danger of life or of the effects mentioned in subarticle

(1)(a), it shall be deemed that the harm could have given
rise to such danger only where the danger was probable
in view of the nature or the natural consequences of the
harm.”
Article 218 (1): “A grievous bodily harm is punishable

with imprisonment for a term from nine months to nine
years –
(a) if it causes any permanent debility of
the health or any permanent functional debility of any
organ of the body, or any permanent defect in any part of
the physical structure of the body, or any permanent
mental infirmity;
(b) if it causes any serious and
permanent disfigurement of the face, neck, or either of the
hands of the person injured;
(c) if, being committed on a woman with child, it causes
miscarriage.
(2): Any debility of the health or any functional debility of
any organ of the body, and any mental infirmity, serious
disfigurement, or defect shall be deemed to be permanent
even when it is probably so.
(3): The punishment for the offences referred to in
subarticle (1) shall be that established in article 312(2) if
the bodily harm is committed by means of any explosive
fluid or substance.
The injuries sustained by Joseph Attard were severe

bruising to his left eye and a laceration over his eyebrow
which needed one suture. Dr. Sawicki affirmed that these
were injuries of a slight nature save complications.
However the correct application of Article 216(1)(b) of

Chapter 9 of the Laws of Malta is that enunciated by Chief
Justice Dr. De Gaetano in Pulizija vs. Francis Dingli
(App. Krim. Decided on 12th September, 1996):
“Ghal finijiet ta’ l-Artikolu 216 (1)(b) jekk

hemmx sfregju jew le hija kwistjoni ta’ fatt rimessa ghal
gudikant tal-kas (f’dan il-kas il-Magistrat) u dan kien
perfettament intitolat li jasal ghal konkluzjoni differenti
Page 45 of 48
Courts of Justice
minn dak li wasal ghaliha l-Espert tal-Qorti. L-appellant

donnu qed jippretendi li biex il-Qorti tiddeciedi jekk offiza
iggibx sfregju fil-wicc o meno, irid jghaddi certu zmien halli
wiehed jara l-effett li thalli l-ferita in kwistjoni fil-wicc. Dan
mhux korrett (emfasi ta’ din il-Qorti) kif gia ntqal, ghall-
finijiet ta’ l-Artikolu 216(1)(b) sfregju anki ta’ ftit granet, per
ezempju sa kemm is-suturi jew ponti jkunu ghadhom
f’posthom, jammonta ghal offiza gravi ghalkemm wara li
jghaddi aktar zmien, il-marka ma tkunx tikkwalifika bhala
sfregju.”
In the light of the above mentioned tenet, upheld by the

Criminal Court of Appeal and in view of the photographs
exhibited by Joseph Attard i.e. Doc.JA1 and Doc.JA2 (at
page 138), the Court is of the opinion that the injuries
sustained by Joseph Attard caused a disfigurement of his
face, albeit one that lasted for a number of days.
The injuries sustained by David Shephard were of a more

serious nature. These injuries were confirmed by Dr.
Nicole Camilleri at Casualty (vide page 86 et seq.) who
verified that David Shephard was admitted to hospital in a
semi-consistent state, that a CT Scan showed a contusion
of the brain which was rendered more serious owing to
the medication that had been prescribed to Shephard,
which medication “would have led to bleeding.” (vide page
91). She stated that he was in danger of losing his life for
one to two hours following his admission to hospital.
Indeed Dr.Marilyn Casha (page 606) confirmed that he

was admitted in the High Dependancy Unit of St.Luke‟s
Hospital. Dr. Nicole Camilleri also confirmed that
Shephard suffered a fracture to his eight rib.
Professor Godfrey Laferla further explained in detail the

injuries sustained by Shephard, stating that further CT
Scans and ultra sound examinations confirmed that
Shephard was bleeding internally within the spleen,
though the spleen itself was not ruptured. Asked to
classify the injuries he stated categorically:
Page 46 of 48
Courts of Justice
“Quite grevious because a rupture of

the spleen is always considered as a life threatening
injury. Fortunately in this case the blood cloth
remained confined within the spleen itself, but had
that ruptured, it would certainly have necessitated a
surgical intervention to save the life of the patient.”
(vide page 688)
This Court, therefore, rejects the assertions made by the

defence in its note of submissions at page 1157, wherein
it was stated that David Shephard was never in danger of
losing his life and finds to the contrary.
The Court therefore is of the opinion that the injuries

sustained by David Shephard fall within the parameters
delineated by Article 216(1)(i) of Chapter 9 of the Laws of
Malta as far as his internal injuries are concerned and
within the remit of Article 216(d) of Chapter 9 of the Laws
of Malta in relation to his fractured rib.
The Court however, after having examined the evidence

of Professor Laferla, wherein he categorically denied that
there was any permanent debility of the spleen and
wherein he confirmed that David Shephard made a full
recovery, is of the opinion that Article 218 of the Criminal
Code, which provides for the most serious and grievious
kinds of bodily harm, does not apply to the case.
Therefore this Court finds the accused, Tristan Scott

Haynes, guilty of the first charge brought against him,
limitedly to the grievious injuries sustained by David
Shephard; guilty of the second charge brought against the
accused Haynes, limitedly to the grievious injuries
sustained by Joseph Attard and after having seen Articles
214, 216(1)(a)(i), 216(1)(d), Article 216(1)(b) of the
Criminal Code, Chapter 9 of the Laws of Malta, condemns
the accused to a period of imprisonment of four (4) years
from which period of imprisonment shall be deducted the
time the accused spent in preventive custody.
Page 47 of 48
Courts of Justice
The nature of the injuries and the ferocity of the assault

precludes the Court from considering any other form of
punishment save that of actual imprisonment.
The Court reserves judgement relating to the other

changes brought against the accused until such time that
he voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of this Court and
therefore adjourns the case sine die.
< Partial Sentence >
----------------------------------END----------------------------------
Page 48 of 48
Courts of Justice

Magistrate Dr. Jacqueline Padovani Summary of Sentence

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Magistrate Dr. Jacqueline Padovani Summary of Sentence

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Magistrate Dr. Jacqueline Padovani Summary of Sentence

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Informal Copy of Judgement

COURT OF MAGISTRATES (MALTA)

Sitting of the 28 th January, 2010

The Court, having seen the charges brought against

With having on the 10th May 2003 at St. Andrews Road

1. Without the intent to kill or to put the life of any

Lukes Hospital and Reuben Briffa having ID Card No

The Court may, where it deems it expedient, in order to

The Court may, deal with the accused to be a recidivist

Having heard the evidence on oath.

Having examined all exhibited documents and all the

Having seen the articles listed by the Attorney General at

Having seen the note in the record of the proceedings of

Having seen the applications of the Commissioner of

Having seen the consent of Attorney General for the issue

Having seen the decrees of this Court exceeding to the

Having seen all the extradition proceedings of the British

Having seen the note of the Attorney General of the 17th

Having seen the notes of final submissions of the

Having seen the notes of submissions of the accused

Inspector Simon Galea prosecuting officer (vide page 15

happened to be passing from St. Andrews Road, Bahar

Police Inspector Galea informed the Court that police

The prosecuting officer informed the Court that Mary

Joseph and Mary Attard were alleging that the incident

Inspector Simon Galea stated that he therefore

The prosecuting officer stated at page 239 that David

Following the collision David Shephard said that he saw

Inspector Simon Galea informed the Court that criminal

Inspector Simon Galea exhibited Doc. SG – judgement of

At page 242 Inspector Simon Galea confirmed that

David Shephard was subsequent to the collision.

The record of the proceedings conducted in the inquiry

Police Sergeant 1131 Justin Camilleri in the evidence at

Police Sergeant Camilleri testified that Briffa told him that

PS Camilleri stated that he spoke to Dr. Nicole Camilleri

Police Sergeant Camilleri testified that he had also

Dr. Sawicki Wojgdek, doctor on duty at the casualty

Dr. Nicole Camilleri at page 86, a medical doctor at St.

Joseph Attard gave evidence at page 95 in the Maltese

found at page 248 at the record of the proceedings.

was lying on the road. The person who stopped to help

He stated that, in the mean time David Shephard‟s wife

In cross examination Joseph Attard stated that he was

overtake the accused and in fact flicked his lights however

Joseph Attard stated that he tried to explain to the

angry about the incident and in fact he had address Mary

Mary Anne Attard at page 313 confirmed the evidence of

them, an English man emerged from it and approached

Maryanne Attard stated that it was at this moment that

Maryanne Attard stated that at this point in time she tried

At one point in time a certain Mr. Briffa came to help them.

she was concentrating on David Shephard as the cars

Mary Shephard at page 332, wife of David Shephard

Mary Shephard stated that she tried to lift her husband

At page 345 Mary Shephard confirmed the evidence that

Reuben Briffa at page 350 stated that on the day in

Reuben Briffa stated that David Shephard was lying on

Briffa stated that he did not see any injuries on the

Reuben Briffa confirmed that he did not at any time