Convicted hitman Vince Muscat is expected to continue his testimony on Tuesday after Monday's sitting heard his detailed account of the planning and execution of Daphne Caruana Galizia's murder.
Day 11 of Yorgen Fenech's trial was dominated by the testimony of convicted hitman turned prosecution witness Vince Muscat ("il-Koħħu"), who gave jurors a detailed account of the planning and execution of Daphne Caruana Galizia's assassination.
He claimed that an earlier 2015 plot to kill the journalist had been commissioned by former minister Chris Cardona for €150,000 but was abandoned after a promised €50,000 deposit never arrived. According to Muscat, the assassination plan was revived in 2017 after Melvin Theuma approached the Degiorgio brothers, with the group agreeing on a €150,000 payment and receiving a €30,000 deposit.
Muscat described months of surveillance on Caruana Galizia, including monitoring her home and daily routine, practising breaking into a vehicle identical to hers and preparing the explosive device later used in the attack. He told jurors the bomb was planted beneath her car on the night before the murder and remotely detonated as she drove away from her Bidnija home on 16 October 2017.
Fenech, 44, has pleaded not guilty to two principal charges: complicity in the wilful homicide of Daphne Caruana Galizia and criminal association to commit the murder.
Five men have already been convicted in connection with Caruana Galizia's assassination. Vince Muscat admitted his role in the murder in 2021 and was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment. Alfred and George Degiorgio each received 40-year prison sentences after pleading guilty in 2022, while Robert Agius and Jamie Vella were sentenced to life imprisonment in 2025 for supplying the bomb used in the attack.
The prosecution is being led by Attorney General lawyers Godwin Cini, Anthony Vella and Danika Vella, assisted by Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud and Inspector Kurt Zahra. Fenech is represented by lawyers Charles Mercieca, Gianella Demarco and Gianluca Caruana Curran, while lawyers Therese Comodini Cachia and Jason Azzopardi are appearing parte civile on behalf of the Caruana Galizia family.
Please refresh for updates
17:35 That concludes today's sitting. The trial will continue tomorrow morning at around 9am. Thank you for following, and we will have a roundup of Tuesday's hearing on our website shortly.
17:29 As the sitting resumed after 5pm, the court hears that the defence has no more questions for Vince Muscat. The prosecution has requested that Muscat be present with the jurors when site visits are held.
16:46 The defence continues pressing Muscat on his recollection of references to Keith Schembri.
"Is there any reason why, whenever Keith Schembri comes up, you seem to forget?"
"I'm only saying what I remember," Muscat replies.
Muscat explains that whenever lawyer David Gatt made the "number one" hand gesture, those present would speak about how "smart" and "good" Keith Schembri was, which, he says, is why they referred to him as "Number One."
The defence continues challenging Muscat's recollection, but he repeatedly responds: "I don't remember." The defence insists it is trying to refresh his memory.
"I only remember what I remember," Muscat replies.
The court will take a short break and will continue at 5pm.
16:44 With cross-examination continuing, the defence asks Vince Muscat why Arthur Azzopardi was no longer acting as his lawyer.
Muscat replies that Azzopardi himself had also been receiving threats. "He even told me, 'Think about your children,'" Muscat says.
The defence then asks about Muscat's efforts to obtain a presidential pardon. "You didn't obtain a pardon the first time, did you?" the defence lawyer asks.
"No," Muscat replies, confirming that he later tried again after some time had passed.
The defence then asks Muscat whether he remembered drawing a diagram made up of boxes or markings during meetings with investigators.
She asks whether Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud and Inspector Kurt Zahra were present and whether names had been replaced by letters. At this stage, prosecutors object, prompting another exchange between the parties.
Muscat replies that he remembers "there were some letters."
The defence suggests that Muscat had become afraid that names would be written down and that Arnaud proposed using letters instead.
Before Muscat can elaborate, the prosecution objects, arguing that the defence is referring to material that is not before the court.
"We cannot verify this because it is not in the acts," the prosecution insists, urging the defence to move on to another line of questioning.
Muscat repeats only that he remembers "there were some letters." The defence then asks Muscat whether he remembered telling Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud that there were two others with Melvin Theuma. Muscat says no.
16:41 As tempers flare between the parties, Judge Edwina Grima intervenes.
"I've had enough. Behave yourselves. The next person who comments will be found in contempt," the judge warns.
The court then delivers its ruling on the disputed document.
Judge Grima notes that the document does not form part of the acts of the present case but originates from separate proceedings pending before the same court against third parties.
She observes that the defence never sought the court's permission to have the document exhibited in these proceedings, despite having made several applications over the years to admit evidence from other cases and magisterial inquiries.
At this stage, the court says it cannot verify whether the document the defence sought to show the witness is an official copy taken from those other proceedings and, consequently, cannot verify its authenticity.
The judge further notes that, since the defence was already in possession of the document, it could have applied at any stage before the start of the jury trial for the court registrar to produce a certified legal copy from the other proceedings.
Instead, the defence failed to do so. The court also notes that the accused did not make a timely application to produce the document, nor was it included in the defence's list of documents or the subject of a request to add it to that list.
For those reasons, the court rejects the defence's request to use the document.
16:22 A point of law is raised regarding a diagram which was not presented in the acts of the case. The judge orders the jurors outside the courtroom.
The point of law was raised after the defence wished to refer Muscat to a diagram showing cetain drawings of the alleged murder plot. Defence lawyer Giannella Demarco confirms the document is not part of the court record. Judge Edwina Grima asks where the diagram is in the acts of the case, prompting discussion between the parties on whether it can be shown to the witness despite not having been formally exhibited in evidence.
The defence argues that similar requests have been allowed in other proceedings.
However, prosecutor Anthony Vella objects, telling the court the defence had ample opportunity to present the document earlier in the case.
He further submits that allowing new evidence to be introduced at this stage of the trial would cause "irreparable prejudice" to the prosecution.
Prosecutor Anthony Vella also argues that the defence acted unfairly by attempting to show the witness a document it knew was not part of the court record.
He tells the court the move resulted in members of the jury seeing the document before any ruling had been made on its admissibility, describing the defence's conduct as "highly unfair."
Concluding his submissions, prosecutor Anthony Vella accuses the defence of acting in bad faith and mumbled "imagine if we had done this."
16:03 The defence points out that Vince Muscat was represented by lawyer Martin Fenech in the Caruana Galizia murder case, while lawyer Arthur Azzopardi only became involved in relation to obtaining a presidential pardon. Muscat agrees.
"Arthur was already my lawyer, but he didn't want to get involved in the Caruana Galizia case. He only came to speak to me about the pardon and helped me try to obtain one," Muscat tells the court. He says several lawyers were approached in the hope that one of them could help him secure a pardon.
According to Muscat, Arthur Azzopardi told him: "I'll make it my mission to get you a pardon." The defence then asks whether Azzopardi also represented Robert Agius, known as tal-Maksar.
Muscat initially says he cannot remember, before later confirming that Azzopardi did act as Agius' lawyer in 2018.
The defence also asks about Muscat's earlier testimony that Azzopardi encouraged him to change his version of events when speaking to Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud. The defence asks Muscat if Azzopardi told him not to mention the Maksar brothers.
Muscat replies that, as Azzopardi was pushing for him to obtain a pardon, he told him: "Mention everyone."
"Even if they were your own clients?" the defence asks.
"Whoever they may be," Muscat recalls Azzopardi replying. "Azzopardi also told me: they might be my clients but the pardon would need to come from the Prime Minister."
Muscat once again confirms that Azzopardi told him to blame Melvin Theuma.
Throughout the testimony, prosecutors are following Muscat's evidence on a monitor positioned opposite the witness stand, displaying a live feed from the courtroom.
15:42 The defence questions Vince Muscat if he or "il-Fulu" had gone to Ferdinand's Bar in Siġġiewi before their arrest.
"You went there looking for Chris Cardona, didn't you?" she asks.
"I think so," Muscat replies. "Did you find him?"
"No, he wasn't there."
"Why were you looking for him?"
"I don't remember," the witness says.
"Weren't you looking for Chris Cardona because you wanted his help?" the defence asks. "Yes," Muscat replies.
The defence then suggests that, in the week before the arrests, Alfred Degiorgio had been trying to contact Cardona because he feared Cardona might leave Malta before they could speak to him.
"I remember something along those lines, but I don't remember exactly," Muscat says.
The defence asks whether Muscat had ever seen Edward Gatt and Chris Cardona together at the Siġġiewi bar before the assassination. "No, I don't remember," Muscat replies.
15.29 The defence is peppering Muscat with questions on how, when and how often Alfred Degiorgio and Cardona spoke. Muscat says he doesn't know. At this point the judge tells the defence not to repeat the same questions.
15:27 The defence asks Muscat regarding his visit with Alfred Degiorgio to look for Chris Cardona around the time of their arrest. Muscat confirmed they had gone to Ferdinand's Bar in Siġġiewi, but they did not find him there. When the defence asks if he had ever personally heard Alfred Degiorgio speak to Cardona, Muscat replied that he had not. The defence then pointed out that in his earlier testimony before the inquiring magistrate, Muscat had stated that Degiorgio and Cardona "would meet in Siġġiewi every Saturday." Muscat disputed this, saying that it was not every Saturday.
15:12 The sitting is set to resume shortly.
13:16: The court adjourns for break, and proceedings will continue at 3pm.
13:13: De Marco asks Muscat about Melvin Theuma's suggestion the group go out for a celebratory meal a day after the assassination.
Muscat confirms Theuma wanted them to celebrate, but says it was Alfred Degiorgio who rejected the idea.
"Why did Melvin want to celebrate?" Judge Edwina Grima asks. “Melvin wanted to celebrate because he had got rid of the problem he had.”
The cross-examination then shifts to the explosive devices.
Muscat reiterates he had been told Robert Agius and Jamie Vella would be bringing three bombs into Malta from abroad.
Asked who told him this, Muscat replies that he had been informed by the others involved in the plot.
The defence asks how much they paid for the explosives and who covered the cost.
"We didn't pay anything," Muscat replies.
"So, they were buy one, get one free?" De Marco remarks sarcastically.
The defence then asks whether Muscat knew if the money for the explosives came from Chris Cardona, or whether David Gatt had told them they were being financed by Keith Schembri.
"I don't know," Muscat replies.
12:55: The defence continues to focus on where the alleged information about the police investigation was coming from after the assassination.
Muscat reiterates it was Alfred Degiorgio who told him the group would be arrested on 4 December.
De Marco then turns to Chris Cardona's movements after the murder.
Muscat says after Cardona moved from Portomaso to Fgura, he drove Alfred Degiorgio there so he could meet Toni l-Iblaħ.
"Toni l-Iblaħ was Cardona's man, wasn't he?" De Marco asks.
Muscat replies he cannot remember exactly what Alfred was going to discuss with Toni l-Iblaħ.
"Was it something related to the murder?" the defence asks.
"I think it was something like that," Muscat replies.
The cross-examination then shifts to lawyer David Gatt.
Muscat says Gatt frequently visited the Marsa potato shed.
Referring to Muscat's previous testimony, De Marco asks about a hand gesture Gatt allegedly made repeatedly by raising one finger.
"Why was he doing that?" she asks.
Muscat says he did not know at the time and had asked George Degiorgio what it meant.
"George told me he was referring to Keith," Muscat replies, explaining that George Degiorgio had identified the person as Keith Schembri, whom he described as "Malta's number one."
According to Muscat, George Degiorgio told him Gatt would repeatedly make the gesture whenever he was referring to Schembri before the assassination.
De Marco then asks whether Gatt continued visiting the potato shed after the murder.
Muscat says he did.
"Did he make any other gestures?" the defence asks.
Muscat replies that Gatt would also imitate an explosion with his hand while making a matching sound with his mouth.
"He did that both before and after the murder, didn't he?" De Marco suggests.
"I don't remember," Muscat replies, before adding that Gatt made the gesture on several occasions.
12:50: Asked whether there was any contact with former minister Chris Cardona after the murder, Muscat replies: "After the murder, no." Then Il-Fulu (Alfred Degiorgio) told me the police were coming on 4 December.
The defence then asks who, during the police investigation, was allegedly passing on information on Cardona's behalf.
"I don't remember," Muscat says.
De Marco presses him about his previous evidence, asking who used to arrive with messages allegedly coming from Cardona.
Muscat says he cannot remember, prompting the defence to refer him to his earlier testimony, in which he had stated that a man known as Toni l-Iblaħ would visit the Marsa potato shed, speak to Alfred Degiorgio and relay messages on Cardona's behalf.
Muscat confirms he remembers Toni l-Iblaħ visiting the potato shed once.
"I remember Toni l-Iblaħ going there once, and I know because Alfred had called me to tell me I didn't need to pick him up because Toni l-Iblaħ was going to take him home," Muscat says.
Asked whether the messages Toni l-Iblaħ allegedly delivered concerned the police investigation or the planned arrests, Muscat repeatedly says he cannot remember.
He adds that Toni l-Iblaħ would sit next to Alfred Degiorgio while Alfred received messages allegedly coming from Chris Cardona.
Throughout this line of questioning, Muscat repeatedly tells the court that he cannot recall many of the specific details.
12:25 The defence asks Muscat whether he ever personally saw Melvin Theuma at the Busy Bee café.
Muscat confirms he did not.
Asked whether he knew if Theuma was meeting on behalf of someone else, Muscat says he does not know.
De Marco then turns to Muscat's evidence regarding former minister Chris Cardona.
She asks whether Muscat remembered Alfred Degiorgio telling him, "Come, let's go to Cardona," before Daphne Caruana Galizia's murder.
Muscat agrees, confirming he drove Alfred Degiorgio to meet Cardona on several occasions before the assassination.
"Four or five times before the murder," Muscat says.
He tells the court he drove Alfred Degiorgio to the entrance of the minister's office near Castille and saw him walk towards the ministry.
Asked what those meetings were for, Muscat says that, in 2017, Cardona was allegedly providing information about where Caruana Galizia could be found, rather than assisting directly in carrying out the murder.
12:10 De Marco then refers Muscat to his previous testimony, in which he had stated lawyer David Gatt was also due to receive a share of the €150,000 agreed for the alleged 2015 murder plot.
Muscat confirms that David Gatt was expected to receive part of the payment.
The defence then asks Muscat about Edgar Brincat, known as "il-Ġojja".
"I knew il-Ġojja," Muscat tells the court, adding Melvin Theuma was often in his company.
According to Muscat, the two organised horse racing betting activities together.
De Marco then asks whether il-Gojja and Theuma were also involved in drug trafficking.
"I don't remember," Muscat replies.
12:03 Muscat reiterates everything he knew came from George Degiorgio.
"That's what George Degiorgio always told me," he says, adding Degiorgio had told
Muscat that they had also purchased mobile phones for the operation.
Muscat says the original plan was to obtain a machine gun and shoot Caruana Galizia. Including him there were four people behind the plot and the group had been promised €150,000 for carrying out the murder.
Muscat says Jamie Vella was the person who was meant to carry out the shooting, adding this was the first murder plan.
The defence says that they obtained information Caruana Galizia worked at a printing press in Msida.
"That I remember. We got that information from David Gatt," Muscat replies.
"We also went to see where she worked so we could find her."
Muscat adds they also travelled to Gżira after, with "David or Chris" providing them with information about her whereabouts.
De Marco then refers Muscat to his previous testimony, in which he had said David Gatt had also obtained Daphne Caruana Galizia's mobile number.
According to that testimony, Gatt repeatedly sent her text messages claiming to have information, but she never replied.
"Daphne told him, 'I don't deal over the phone... come and face me,'" Muscat recalls.
"I was next to him when he received that message."
Muscat says Gatt would occasionally send messages to Caruana Galizia and, after doing so, they would hide the mobile phone beneath the canopy at the Marsa potato shed before later checking whether she had replied.
He explains they were trying to find out what had happened because they had not seen Caruana Galizia for around three days.
11:47 Muscat confirms that in 2015, George Degiorgio had purchased a mobile phone and sent numerous messages to Daphne Caruana Galizia, pretending to provide her with information.
11:43 The defence questions Muscat about the four individuals reportedly behind the 2015 plot; Muscat confirmed George had mentioned them, though the only name he recalled was former police commissioner Michael Cassar, who has denied any involvement. Regarding Chris Cardona's role, Muscat reiterated that it was "all talk," explaining that George had pressured David Gatt to speak with Cardona to secure the €50,000 deposit, noting that the two men had shared a legal practice before Cardona became minister. Muscat stated that as far as he knew, Gatt would meet Cardona at a bar in Valletta frequented by lawyers. When asked why the money never arrived, Muscat said he was told Cardona was abroad.
11:38 During cross-examination, the defence asked Muscat who told George Degiorgio to contact Chris Cardona. Muscat stated he did not remember. When the defence read from his previous testimony - where Muscat had said George told him "David [Gatt] told me they want to kill Daphne, Chris Cardona put me up to it," followed by Muscat driving George to a meeting with Cardona in Portomaso - Muscat replied that he did not recall that testimony, nor did he remember Gatt telling George about the plot.
11:30 The defence asks Muscat why Alfred Degiorgio was not involved in the initial 2015 plot to kill Daphne Caruana Galizia. Muscat explained that Alfred was in prison in that year. When the defence asked who had informed him about the 2015 job, Muscat stated that George Degiorgio had met with Chris Cardona at Portomaso, though they did not know the nature of the meeting at the time. When specifically asked by the defence if the person involved was David Gatt, Muscat denied this, reiterating that George had told him it was Chris Cardona who wanted to get rid of Daphne.
11:20 The court reconvened, and defence lawyer Giannella de Marco began her cross-examination of prosecution witness Vince Muscat, known as il-Koħħu.
10:56: Vincent Muscat is shown a series of photographs relating to the surveillance carried out on Daphne Caruana Galizia.
Muscat stands up from the witness stand to get a better view of the images and identifies one of the vehicles used during the surveillance operation as his own.
With that, the prosecution concludes its examination of Muscat.
The court adjourns for a 30-minute break.
Proceedings will resume at 11:45am, when the defence is expected to begin its cross-examination.
10:55: The prosecution then asks Muscat about a meeting with Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud during which the name of Yorgen Fenech was mentioned.
Muscat says that this was the first time Fenech's name first came up.
"I asked, 'Inspector, is this gentleman going to be charged?'" Muscat tells the court.
According to Muscat, Arnaud replied: "Anyone can be charged."
Muscat recalls Arnaud banging his hand on the table before saying: "Mis-sema l-isfel kulhadd l-istess." (Everyone is the same)
Asked why he raised the question, Muscat says he felt sympathy for Fenech because he was "a prominent person."
The prosecution then asks whether Muscat ever knew who was behind Melvin Theuma.
"No," Muscat replies, adding that this was the only occasion on which he heard Yorgen Fenech's name mentioned.
Asked who gave the order for Daphne Caruana Galizia's murder, Muscat says he only knew the name Melvin Theuma, who, according to him, was receiving instructions from someone else whose identity he did not know.
Questioned about who financed the assassination, Muscat says that, to the best of his knowledge, all the money came through Melvin Theuma.
He tells the court Theuma initially handed over €1,000, before the agreed €150,000 payment for the murder, including a €30,000 deposit which Alfred Degiorgio collected after meeting Theuma.
10:50 The prosecution continues questioning Muscat about his first meetings with investigators.
Muscat says during one meeting, Assistant Police Commissioner Keith Arnaud and his then lawyer, Arthur Azzopardi, were both present.
He recalls being asked whether either of them had told him to say anything untrue about Melvin Theuma.
"Yes, but what they were telling me to say wasn't true," Muscat replies, referring to a version of events he says he was encouraged to give.
Muscat also said Azzopardi wanted him to falsely claim Theuma owed him money or to put forward another false explanation.
Muscat says he cannot remember why his lawyer wanted him to say this.
"I only remember [lawyer] Arthur Azzopardi saying it, Arnaud objecting, and then he left," Muscat tells the court.
Asked again why Azzopardi wanted him to alter his testimony, Muscat replies he cannot remember but also said that Azzopardi himself later received threats in connection with the case.
The prosecution then asks whether he was the first person to mention Melvin Theuma to the police.
"Yes, I was the first one who mentioned him," Muscat says, adding: "The police got where they got because of me."
Turning to his time in prison, Muscat explains although his family regularly brought him food because he disliked the prison meals, he eventually became afraid it could be poisoned.
"The prison wasn't going to make me broth or kawlata (vegetable soup), was it?" he says, explaining this fear eventually led him to stop eating the food brought by his family.
10:27 The prosecution then asks Muscat about the events which led to him cooperating with the police.
Muscat tells the court his lawyer at the time, Arthur Azzopardi, visited him in prison and spoke to him about the possibility of obtaining a presidential pardon.
"My lawyer told me to speak to Keith Arnaud, and I agreed". Muscat says. "I spoke to the police in the hope of obtaining a pardon."
Asked what happened after he began speaking to investigators, Muscat says George Degiorgio confronted him in prison.
"George and Alfred were next to me. George told me, 'We've got information that you're talking,'" Muscat recalls.
The prosecution asks how the Degiorgio brothers found out he had been speaking to police.
Muscat says he does not know for certain but believes George Degiorgio learnt about it through Melvin Theuma.
"They had a mobile phone in prison through which they were communicating with Melvin," he tells the court.
Asked how he felt after realising the others knew he was cooperating with investigators, Muscat says he was afraid.
"I was scared something would happen to my family," he says, adding he heard threats that acid would be thrown at his children.
He tells the court he interpreted this as a credible threat against his family because, he says, he knew what those people were capable of.
10.25 The prosecution then turns to the period when Muscat began cooperating with police.
The court heard someone close to Muscat was approached a few days before he pleaded guilty. Muscat confirms that person was Peter Brincat, the father of his wife.
The prosecution asks about an alleged offer made by Robert Agius tal-Maksar, and Jamie Vella.
Muscat testifies the pair allegedly offered €1,500 a month on the condition that he did not mention them to the police during the investigation.
Asked whether Peter Brincat accepted the proposal, Muscat says "no". Muscat also said Brincat visited him in prison just twice.
The prosecution then asks whether Muscat ever received any money from Robert Agius or Jamie Vella.
"No," Muscat replies.
10:23 The prosecution moves on to the period leading up to the arrests of the alleged hitmen.
Asked whether they knew in advance police were going to arrest them, Muscat replies they did.
"We agreed that when the police arrived, we'd give them everything so there wouldn't be too much hassle," he says, explaining the three of them had discussed how they should behave during the arrests.
The prosecution asks whether they had agreed to appear upset or keep their heads down when officers arrived.
Muscat says he cannot remember the exact details but recalls they wanted to project the impression "we had powerful people backing us."
The questioning then shifts to the financial support Muscat received while in prison. Muscat says he was mainly visited by family members, although at the time his relationship with them was strained because they wanted to know where the money being passed on to him was coming from.
Muscat tells the court he received sums of around €200 to €300, paid in instalments through family members during the early stages of his imprisonment.
He explains the money was passed through Lawrence Pace, known as il-Lolly, who gave it to his partner's father, who in turn passed it on to Muscat's partner.
Muscat says he did not know who was giving the money to Pace but had been told by family members it was being collected at a band club.
Judge Edwina Grima asks whether Melvin Theuma had ever passed him money.
Muscat replies Theuma had sometimes gone to the band club, before confirming, after being referred to his previous testimony, Theuma had passed over some money to him via his wife while he was in prison.
Asked whether those payments continued, Muscat says they stopped after his wife refused to accept any further money.
9:53 The prosecution turns to the explosive device used in the assassination, asking Muscat about discussions concerning its power.
Muscat recalls a conversation in which George Degiorgio told Robert Agius and Jamie Vella it should not be like the bomb used in the attempted murder of Romeo Bone in Msida.
"It had to cause more damage. That I remember for sure," Muscat tells the court.
Judge Edwina Grima asks who made that remark.
"George said it to Jamie and Robert. I was there and heard him say it," Muscat replies, adding Bone had lost both legs in the explosion, a case that had featured in the news.
Asked why they wanted a more powerful device, Muscat says: "They wanted Daphne dead, not injured."
He explains a petrol-filled bottle was incorporated into the device to increase the blast and says Alfred Degiorgio deliberately placed the bomb beneath the driver's seat, rather than in the middle of the car, to maximise the damage.
The prosecution then returns to Chris Cardona's alleged involvement.
Muscat also recalls encouraging Alfred Degiorgio to ask Cardona directly for information, saying: "If you're not going to ask him, then who are you going to ask?"
Asked where Cardona allegedly obtained information about the case, Muscat says he remembers Alfred Degiorgio telling him former police deputy commissioner Silvio Valletta was passing information to Cardona through another intermediary.
At this point, the prosecution refers Muscat to his previous testimony that Cardona would send messages to Edward Gatt, who would then communicate with Valletta. Muscat confirms that account before the court.
09:49 With the jury out of the courtroom, defence lawyer Charles Mercieca objects to the prosecution's line of questioning.
Mercieca argues the prosecutor should be careful when telling the witness, "you always said this", insisting this is presented as a statement of fact when, according to the defence, it is not accurate.
The defence further argues Muscat has already been questioned repeatedly about the timing of the deposit and has consistently maintained the same answer when confronted with another extract from his earlier testimony.
Prosecutor Godwin Cini counters Muscat has testified on numerous occasions throughout these proceedings, including during the compilation of evidence, the Degiorgio brothers' proceedings and last year's Maksar jury trial.
He insists the witness has consistently stated the deposit was received after the general election.
Cini argues yesterday's court decree clearly permits the prosecution to refer the witness to his previous testimony to refresh his memory. He says the prosecution now intends to refer Muscat to two further extracts dealing specifically with when the deposit intended for the assassination was handed over, maintaining this falls squarely within the scope of the court's ruling.
Judge Edwina Grima rules on the objection, reminding the prosecution that it had already questioned Muscat more than once about when the deposit for the assassination was allegedly handed over.
The court notes that, with its permission, the prosecution had previously referred Muscat to extracts from his testimony during the compilation of evidence to refresh his memory. At that stage, however, the prosecution did not refer him to the additional passages it now wishes to rely on.
Judge Grima observes the prosecution itself had argued it was important to refer to Muscat's compilation testimony to preserve the chronology of events and avoid taking his evidence out of context. Having already been granted that opportunity, the prosecution should have referred to all the relevant extracts at that time.
The court notes Muscat answered the question on more than one occasion, including after being confronted with the relevant extract from his compilation testimony, and that his answer remained unchanged.
"The prosecution cannot continue asking the same question in the hope of obtaining the answer it wants," the judge rules, adding a witness who has testified under oath and has already had his memory refreshed on a particular point cannot repeatedly be asked the same question.
Judge Grima instructs the prosecution to continue with its examination on other matters.
09:29 Prosecutor Godwin Cini begins by revisiting the timeline surrounding the €30,000 deposit allegedly handed over by Melvin Theuma, asking Vincent Muscat to clarify whether it was received before or after the 2017 general election.
Godwin Cini points out in previous testimony, including during the compilation of evidence and the magisterial inquiry, Muscat had consistently stated the deposit was paid after the election. However, during Monday's sitting, Muscat said he was no longer certain.
"The years keep passing and it's difficult to remember exactly, but I believe it was a little before the election," Muscat tells the court.
Cini then reads excerpts from Muscat's previous testimony, noting on three separate occasions he had testified Theuma got the deposit after the election.
Defence lawyer Charles Mercieca objects, arguing the witness has already answered the question and the prosecutor is repeatedly putting the same point to him.
As the disagreement continues, Judge Edwina Grima interrupts proceedings and orders the jury to leave the courtroom for a legal point to be argued in their absence.
09:16 Judge Edwin Grima, the jurors, and lawyers are all in position as the morning session gets underway.
Convicted hitman Vincent Muscat should have returned to the witness stand earlier, but he got stuck in a court lift while being escorted to the court room.
After a short wait, he returns to the witness stand and will once again be testifying while seated.
9:10 Good morning and welcome to the liveblog for the 12th day of the jury trial of Yorgen Fenech, who is accused of masterminding the assassination of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.