The Malta Independent 19 April 2024, Friday
View E-Paper

Victim’s family asks court to take action as building where murder took place was demolished

Tuesday, 24 January 2017, 16:16 Last update: about 8 years ago

The family of Neville Baldacchino, the man who was allegedly killed by Stephen Caruana, have asked the court to take any necessary action as the place where the murder took place was demolished and now more works are being carried out.

The case surrounds the murder of Mr Baldacchino which occurred on 19 December 2008.

Mr Baldacchino, 28, was found dead on the roof of the accused’s residence on the night of 18 December.

The accused was charged on the related counts of possessing an unlicensed shotgun and firing it in an inhabited area. He is thought to have shot Mr Baldacchino a total of three times with a shotgun, killing him on the spot. According to the accused, he was investigating noises in his house in the middle of the night. The incident occurred near the stroke of 1am on the roof terrace of Mr Caruana’s home in Drama Street, Qormi. Mr Caruana’s wife and four children were in the house at the time.

In a letter to the courts signed by lawyer Edward Gatt, the Baldacchino family is calling on the courts to investigate allegations that the prosecuting officer in the case, Inspector Daniel Zammit, has commercial interests with the family of the accused. It appears that Mr Zammit had partnered up with the Gaffarena family prior to taking up the case. The victim, Mr Baldacchino, was allegedly having an affair with Joe Gaffarena’s daughter, thus the commercial and familiar conflict of interest.

It appears that the building where the murder allegedly took place was demolished and replaced by another. The court was never notified of this even though this case was to be heard in front of a jury. Recently, the family also found out that there were construction works going on at this same building.

“Although the court had ordered an architect to inspect the building where the case took place, the jurors will not be able to visit the site in question because it was demolished,” the lawyer argued.

“We ask the court to look into the matter and see that it takes the action it deems necessary.”

 

  • don't miss