It is understood that the police are making the recordings mainly when a serious crime has been committed, when there could be a risk of losing a conviction due to conflicting statements, or when there is a danger of a person changing their version of events.

Sources told The Malta Independent that the police still make a transcription of the person’s statement and the old-fashioned written statement format is still used when statements are taken for lesser offences.

One of the pioneering cases for using this technique is the current compilation of evidence against three men, Karmenu Harbat Sant, Michael Vella, known as il-fish, and George Pace who are accused of complicity to murder.

It is understood that this sort of crime fits the bill perfectly for the testing of the new system. The murder was allegedly committed in 1989, and because the police thought there would be a considerable number of statements and counter accusations, they proceeded to record the statements of the three men.

When one of the accused denied any involvement and said he did not even know the other two men, his recording was played back to him and the police then set-up a confrontation between the two men. Court testimony revealed that the technique worked, because the man who had previously denied any of the allegations immediately told them the truth.

The way the new system works is that once the recording is finished and the person released, they are given a copy of the audio recording. But a written statement is also drafted to be presented in court if the need arises.

The suspect can always give the recording to his lawyer if he desires. If that person is charged in court, his legal team can request a copy of the recording from the court, once the original and transcript have been submitted as evidence.

Most lawyers think the step is a good one, especially for suspects who are actually innocent. One source said: “If a person is innocent, they have nothing to hide and there will be no misconceptions or misquotes in their statement. This obviously works in favour of the police if a suspect has actually committed a crime, as they cannot chop and change what they have said.”

Another lawyer told The Malta Independent that it was especially good for innocent parties as not only their story, but also their tone of voice as well as their attitude will be recorded on tape. “At the end of the day, a live but total recording of what a person has said is much more faithful than a transcription of what they have said. There will be no errors in the transcription and it is a much better way to analyse what has been said in the context of events,” he said.

The lawyers both agreed that audio recordings would almost completely eliminate allegations by suspects that they said something which they did not. “You will no longer have people saying ‘I did not say that’ once they get to court because there will be a recording of what they said and the manner in which they said it.”

[email protected]