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
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.