The compilation of evidence against members of the Pace family continued in court on Tuesday, with investigators detailing a complex web of property holdings, unexplained income, and assets allegedly linked to an extensive loan-sharking operation.

Inspector Leanne Bonello told the court that she was assigned to the investigation in March 2025 after several reports suggested that Keith Pace was engaged in usury and intimidation linked to private lending activities.

According to the inspector, Keith Pace had previously been brought before court around 40 times on various charges, including theft and other offences. Investigators also received reports alleging that Pace had forcibly entered properties belonging to debtors.

Despite officially being listed as unemployed, Bonello explained that Pace had received some €53,000 in social security benefits between 2014 and 2025. Records showed he had only briefly worked with a local council and later with a small infrastructure company as a project manager.

However, the inspector noted that the company in question had only two employees - Pace and its manager.

Financial records presented in court showed substantial movements through Pace's Revolut account, including around €109,000 entering and €105,000 leaving the account during 2025, largely through cheque deposits and cash transactions. Bonello remarked that the volume of transactions was significantly higher than the income expected from social security benefits.

The investigation also uncovered an extensive portfolio of property allegedly connected to the family. Bonello told the court that Keith Pace appears to control around 10 properties, some rented out and others occupied by family members.

Among these were properties in Marsa, Tarxien, Ħamrun and Sliema, as well as garages and residences that investigators believe were linked to family members or alleged debtors. One of the garages was purchased by Carlos Pace for €65,000. Evidence was also presented regarding a garage in Marsa and other locations, including one allegedly transferred to Keith Pace as a donation.

Investigators also examined the finances of other family members.

Maria Pace, who has six children, three with Keith Pace, has not been employed since 2003, the inspector testified. Her bank records allegedly show spending mainly on supermarkets and online shopping, while she receives child-related allowances dating back to 1998.

Carlos Pace, Bonello said, had previously been arraigned in court in relation to a drug heist at the AFM Safi barracks, and financial records indicated that he had received more than €50,000 through cheques and cash. He also purchased a garage in Marsa for €50,000

Lawrence Pace was described as having worked only six years in his lifetime, yet records showed he also received approximately €50,000 in cash and cheque transactions and owns a Jaguar registered in his name since 2022.

Another family member, Emanuela Pace, never held a driving licence but had 16 vehicles registered in her name, despite never having been employed. Although investigators were told she inherited money, Bonello said no documentation supporting this inheritance was found.

During searches following their arrest, authorities seized several vehicles believed to be linked to the investigation, including an Isuzu, an Austin Mini Moke, a BMW, three Mercedes-Benz cars, and a Chevrolet Corvette. 

Police also discovered €93,000 in cash hidden in various places around the Marsa residence, including inside sofas, in safes, and even concealed in ceiling spaces and a fireplace. Officers also found jewellery and other valuables.

The Marsa property, where Keith, Maria and Cleaven Pace reside, contained two safes in which some of the money and valuables were stored.

Officers also encountered a number of animals, including two monkeys allegedly kept illegally, 11 chihuahuas, several birds and even a Shetland pony kept on the roof, the inspector added.

Throughout the lengthy sitting, the court was presented with a series of documents and financial records supporting the prosecution's claims regarding the family's assets and financial activity.

At the conclusion of the testimony, the court ruled that the evidence presented so far establishes a prima facie case, allowing the compilation of evidence proceedings to continue.

Usury victims testify

The court also heard testimony from another alleged victim, who said she had borrowed €2,000 from Keith Pace in May of last year after separating from her partner. She explained that she knew Pace through her ex-partner, who also had financial dealings with him.

The woman said the loan required repayments of around €300 per month, although Pace sometimes accepted smaller amounts when she struggled financially and allowed her to change payment dates. She later agreed to take over repayments for a loan her ex-partner owed to Pace, meaning she was paying two monthly instalments of €300.

Between them, she estimated they had borrowed about €6,000, and she had repaid roughly €1,500 in cash so far. Asked how Pace benefitted, she explained that on her €2,000 loan she was expected to repay around €4,000, double the amount she had agreed with him. She added that because she does not drive, Pace would personally go to her home to collect the payments.

Another witness also testified about borrowing money from Pace after the roof of her home collapsed, leaving her in dire straits. The woman told the court she approached Pace because she had heard he lent money and described him and his family as "good people." 

She explained that she had asked Pace for €10,000, but he gave her €5,000, agreeing that the rest would be settled later. The agreement was formalised through a notarial contract, which she said was drawn up in the presence of both Keith and Carlos Pace.

However, the document she signed stated that she had borrowed €9,750 not €5,000. When asked about the discrepancy, the woman told the court she did not know why the figure was higher and said the amount had been set by Keith Pace. However, it was concluded that she was aware of the higher figure on the contract. 

The court noted that the witness appeared nervous while giving evidence and asked whether anyone had approached her about changing her testimony.

The woman said she had been repaying the loan in €700 monthly instalments, starting in January 2025, and had made seven payments so far. She told the court she later asked Pace for another €1,000 because she did not have enough money to eat, which increased her outstanding debt to €5,600. According to her calculations, the total amount she now owed had reached around €10,500. 

She also recounted receiving a phone call from Maria Pace regarding a missed payment. During that call, the woman claimed Maria told her that if she were anyone else and the debt had remained unpaid, they would have already taken the property she had guaranteed. 

At one point during the testimony, Keith Pace shouted that the witness was lying, while the defence suggested she had in fact asked for €2,000 rather than €1,000 to cover her bills. The woman maintained that Pace had ultimately given her €1,000.

Defence challenges prima facie evidence

During the sitting, the defence challenged the prima facie case against Cleaven Pace, arguing that there was no evidence linking him to the alleged crimes.

The defence insisted that "absolutely nothing is mentioned with regards to Cleaven Pace," maintaining that the only connection to the case was the fact that he lived in the same Marsa residence where some of the cash and assets were discovered.

They argued that this alone could not justify his prosecution, noting that children also live in the same house but were not arrested. The defence further claimed that items found in Cleaven's room during the searches did not even belong to him.

The prosecution responded by reminding the court that Cleaven Pace is not charged with usury, but argued that there were still sufficient indications to justify the continuation of proceedings against him. Prosecutors noted that Cleaven never had a fixed job yet managed to purchase property, while also residing in the same home where large amounts of cash were discovered.

They added that in cases of doubt, the court should lean towards allowing the prosecution to proceed so the evidence can be fully examined.

The defence also contested the prima facie case against Emanuela Pace, arguing that the only allegation against her relates to vehicles registered in her name. According to the defence, Emanuela had told police that she was unaware that the vehicles even existed. Describing herself as a housewife, she told investigators that she had no knowledge of what her children were doing, and therefore could not be considered an accomplice in any alleged money laundering activity.

The prosecution countered that the court should consider whether Emanuela could reasonably claim ignorance. Prosecutors argued that if her son had purchased such assets while she was aware of his criminal history, the question arises whether she knew about the situation but chose to remain silent.

Inspector Leanne Bonello, who is leading the prosecution together with lawyers Neville Galea and Michael Muscat from the Office of the Attorney General, testified about the financial and property investigations carried out into the accused.

Defence lawyers Franco Debono, Marion Camilleri and Adreana Zammit are appearing for the brothers and their father, while lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Jacob Magri represent the older accused.