A 69-year-old pensioner has been denied bail after being charged with multiple serious domestic abuse offences against his wife of 40 years.  

The man, a father, is accused of repeated threats, psychological terror, and sexual abuse, with the risk assessment describing the situation as one of extreme danger.

According to police reports, the accused became increasingly controlling and paranoid in recent months, exhibiting erratic and violent behaviour. His wife reported that he had threatened to kill and bury her, often locking the doors of their yard to prevent neighbours from hearing her screams. He would assert dominance by saying: "I'm the man - you have to do what I say."

The abuse allegedly included non-consensual sexual acts.

In one alarming episode, he allegedly pressed a butter knife to her neck in a threatening manner. The woman's children, after learning of the abuse, confronted their father, who allegedly told them he regretted not stabbing their mother.

In another incident, the man reportedly picked up a knife in front of police officers, held it to his neck and said he wanted to take his own life. He was temporarily admitted to Mount Carmel Hospital and has since been discharged.

The accused pleaded not guilty. The defence requested a ban on the name which the court accepted. Meanwhile, the victim expressed her wish to withdraw the charges and stated she would not testify on the merits of the case. However, the Attorney General's legal team insisted on hearing her explain why.

The woman, giving testimony in court, described her emotional state when filing the police report as panicked.

She said, "When I left the police station, I immediately regretted it. My husband is not aggressive - he just needs love and treatment. We've been married for 40 years. There's a huge void in the house without him. He has early dementia and paranoia."

She also disclosed that one of their sons had recently been imprisoned over drug offences, which she said contributed to her husband's mental state. The woman admitted to suffering from severe depression herself.

When asked directly if her initial report to police were true, she replied, "Yes and no - I used to overreact and provoke him." Regarding the butter knife incident, she downplayed it, saying, "he was just trying to scare me, to look cool, it was only a knife used for butter."

The Attorney General's lawyer reminded the victim that withdrawing the complaint would strip the court of the power to protect her. Asked if she felt in danger or needed protection, the woman replied instantly: "No."

The court, however, did not accept her request to halt proceedings. The magistrate noted that the victim demonstrated how emotionally vulnerable she was and how deeply attached she remained to her husband - even to the extent of blaming herself. Despite her change of heart, the court stated it could not ignore the serious nature of the allegations and the associated risk.

A risk assessment concluded that the victim remained in extreme danger. The court cited the purpose of the law - to intervene and prevent escalation - and ruled that proceedings must continue in the interest of justice and protection.

The defence requested bail, proposing that the accused reside with his son, who lives with his wife. However, the son admitted he is not the legal owner of the property, as it belongs to his father-in-law.

The Attorney General's office raised concerns that this arrangement placed the accused in an "uncontrolled environment," where he could be expelled from the home at any moment.

It was also said that the accused would likely spend most of his time at the residence and that, under such an arrangement, his wife, the victim would be unable to visit the home - a point to which the son agreed.

The court denied the bail request, ordering temporary supervision for the accused instead. The defence lawyer argued that incarceration could be more damaging to the accused due to his mental health condition, requesting he be held on the forensic side of prison. The court responded that this decision must be made by a medical professional.

Prosecution is being led by Attorney General lawyers Jurgen Dalli and Jennifer Polidano, along with Inspector Christian Cauchi. The defence is represented by lawyer Cathleen Grima.