Former Police Commissioner Lawrence Cutajar was accused by Yorgen Fenech's defence team of being "corrupt" and of lying under oath, as he testified in the murder trial concerning the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia.
He also told jurors on Monday that his contact with Edgar Brincat was a genuine policing exercise aimed at gathering intelligence on murder middleman Melvin Theuma, insisting he had acted transparently and informed investigators, the Malta Security Service and Europol about the encounter.
Cutajar's testimony occupied much of Monday's sitting in the trial of businessman Yorgen Fenech, who has pleaded not guilty to complicity in the wilful homicide of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia and to criminal association to commit the murder.
Caruana Galizia, a columnist with The Malta Independent, was killed in a car bomb on October 16, 2017.
Taking the witness stand just after Brincat had concluded his own testimony, Cutajar informed the court that he is currently the subject of a separate magisterial inquiry concerning alleged leaks from the Caruana Galizia murder investigation. He said his lawyer had advised him not to answer questions touching on that inquiry, although he personally would have preferred to respond. Madam Justice Edwina Grima reminded him that he had the legal right not to answer questions that could incriminate him.
Cutajar then recounted the events of October 16, 2017, saying he first learned of the explosion that killed Caruana Galizia through police radio communications. He immediately ensured that the duty magistrate and forensic experts were informed before going to Bidnija to verify that the crime scene had been secured.
He testified that once informed foreign agencies would be assisting the investigation, he instructed officers not to take any action without first consulting the inquiring magistrate. Keith Arnaud, he said, served as lead investigator throughout the murder probe.
The former commissioner said he was kept regularly updated by Arnaud and former Deputy Police Commissioner Silvio Valletta as the investigation progressed. He recalled that investigators eventually arrested and charged the Degiorgio brothers and Vince Muscat, adding that his position had always been that arrests should only be made when supported by sufficiently strong evidence.
He also described discussions surrounding Vince Muscat's eventual request for a presidential pardon, explaining that such requests were assessed by investigators before recommendations were submitted to the Police Commissioner for action.
He said investigators began uncovering information suggesting the existence of recordings and intercepted communications that could prove significant to the murder investigation, eventually leading police towards Melvin Theuma. This prompted regular meetings involving senior investigators, the Malta Security Service, Europol and representatives of the Attorney General's Office to determine the best course of action.
According to Cutajar, investigators deliberately postponed Theuma's arrest because they feared acting too early could jeopardise the wider investigation.
He explained that an immediate arrest might have resulted in insufficient evidence to justify continued detention, forcing police to release Theuma while simultaneously alerting him that investigators were closing in. The information pointing towards Theuma was already available by December 2018, he testified, but caution prevailed.
Cutajar also told the court that separate meetings were held at Castille to update then Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and his chief of staff Keith Schembri on developments in the investigation. He said he attended at least two such meetings after Silvio Valletta stepped away from the case and believed the meetings had been requested by Arnaud. The discussions centred largely on the recordings and intercepted communications linked to Theuma.
He described another decision taken during the investigation as "vital" - instructing the Financial Crime Investigation Department to investigate Theuma. That investigation, he said, created sufficient legal grounds for Theuma's eventual arrest, although he stressed he played no part in the inquiry itself and received no operational updates.
Cutajar then turned to the issue that featured prominently during his testimony - his contact with Edgar Brincat.
He told jurors that Brincat had approached him regarding a traffic contravention. Knowing that Brincat was close to Theuma, he used the opportunity to try to obtain information that might assist investigators.
"There was no secrecy in this," Cutajar maintained, saying investigators routinely approach people believed to possess useful information.
He explained that his "police mind" immediately recognised the opportunity when Brincat contacted him. Having spent years policing Qormi, he said he knew both the locality and many of its residents well, including where Brincat lived.
Despite his efforts, however, Brincat never disclosed the contents of any recordings to him.
Cutajar insisted he had openly informed investigators, the inquiring magistrate, the Malta Security Service and Europol about the contact, adding that none of those authorities suggested he had acted improperly.
After the lunch break, Cutajar testified that he spoke to Brincat about the existence of Melvin Theuma's recordings, specifically asking Brincat if he knew their whereabouts.
He stated that he subsequently informed the investigators on the case that he was in communication with someone regarding the recordings, and although he was not entirely certain, he believed he had identified that person to them as Brincat.
Cutajar noted that Theuma was later arrested by the financial crimes department, at which point he was informed that recordings had been discovered inside a box. He concluded by stating, "I never saw them myself."
Cutajar testified that he met with Edgar Brincat one additional time.
He claimed his interactions with Brincat were intended as "bait," explaining that he led Brincat to believe he was handling a contravention issue to secure information about Theuma's recordings, though he noted Brincat never provided any useful information.
Cutajar insists throughout his testimony that his ongoing contact with Brincat was solely for the purpose of learning more about the existence and location of the tapes.
It is here that the defence said that Cutajar had lied under oath.
The defence told the court former Police Commissioner Lawrence Cutajar has repeatedly stated under oath he did not discuss the case with anyone before giving his testimony on 22 July 2020, or at any stage beforehand.
However, the defence argued the court and the jury have heard recordings of conversations between Cutajar and Edgar Brincat in which they allegedly discuss circumstances related to the case and agree on how they should testify so as to be "on the same line."
In light of this, the defence submits that there is a question over Cutajar's credibility and argues that the issue is not one of refreshing the witness's memory
When confronted, Cutajar said that he did not remember when the conversation in question took place but recognised Brincat's voice.
Defence lawyer Gianella De Marco pointed out in her cross-examination that the intercepted phone call was made after Melvin Theuma was granted a presidential pardon and after several individuals had already been arraigned in court.
She asked Cutajar why he told the court earlier that he had not discussed his testimony with anyone before giving evidence.
Cutajar rejected the suggestion that he lied, replying: "I didn't lie about anything. Where did I lie?"
When he is reminded that he has just testified moments ago that he had not discussed his evidence with anyone before the compilation of evidence, Cutajar says he had "completely forgotten" about the phone call.
The defence continued to press him on why he felt the need to discuss his testimony with Edgar Brincat, suggesting the call had been intercepted by the Malta Security Service.
Cutajar denies there was any agreement between them.
When the defence quoted a passage in which he allegedly says it was "important that we keep the same line," Cutajar replied that by "the same line" he meant telling the truth, not agreeing on a version of events.
The tension was ratcheted up even further after De Marco twice accused Cutajar of being "corrupt."
Madam Justice Edwina Grima intervened, stopping the line of questioning.
Cutajar firmly rejected the accusation, telling the court that the investigation into Daphne Caruana Galizia's assassination was successfully solved while he was police commissioner.
He says the investigation was particularly challenging because a car bomb attack left little evidence but maintains that the case was nevertheless cracked under his leadership.
Cutajar consistently denied that he ever disclosed any information relating to the murder investigation, and he also said that he did not even know when the police raid leading to Theuma's arrest was set to take place.
He explained that the investigation into Theuma's alleged illegal lottery activities could have resulted in his arrest independently of the murder investigation.
He also, however, maintained that without the recordings there would have been no evidence linking Theuma to the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia.
He also acknowledged that there had been a disagreement over whether Theuma should be arrested, precisely because at the time the recordings were the main piece of potential evidence, even though investigators did not yet know what they contained.
Questioned by the defence, Lawrence Cutajar denied that Melvin Theuma asked to meet him after his arrest, replying: "No, no, no."
He maintained that nobody informed him such a request had been made and adds that nobody had any reason to ask for him.
Asked whether Melvin Theuma was granted a presidential pardon on the same day he was arrested, Cutajar said that he thinks that this was the case.
Cutajar said that the meeting he attended at Castille concerned Theuma's pardon, not Vince Muscat's.
He also testified under cross-examination that he first learned of the photo of Theuma and Keith Schembri from media reports.
De Marco also asked why Theuma's pardon referred to the 2007 HSBC robbery and the Casino di Venezia and HSBC Qormi robberies in 2010, but Cutajar said that he was not involved in the drafting of the pardon.
---
Before Cutajar took the witness stand, the court heard the conclusion of testimony from Edgar Brincat, a close friend of Melvin Theuma, as the defence continued to challenge his recollection of recorded conversations and previous police statements.
Much of the cross-examination centred on audio recordings between Brincat and Theuma, with the defence questioning him about references to former Office of the Prime Minister official Kenneth Camilleri, former chief of staff Keith Schembri and Yorgen Fenech. At several points, poor audio quality led to disagreements over the contents of the recordings, prompting the court to allow jurors to use transcripts while listening to the recordings.
Brincat maintained that he had never advised Theuma to fabricate evidence or begin making recordings. Instead, he said the only advice he gave was that Theuma should refer to individuals by name so there would be no confusion about whom he was speaking. He also denied coaching Theuma on what he should tell investigators or encouraging him to implicate anyone falsely.
The defence repeatedly highlighted inconsistencies between Brincat's testimony and previous statements, particularly concerning Kenneth Camilleri, Johann Cremona and discussions about bail. While Brincat acknowledged that his recollection was imperfect and admitted he could not remember a number of details, he rejected suggestions that he had been directing Theuma on what to include in his recordings. When confronted with excerpts from recorded conversations, he explained that references to Kenneth Camilleri were intended only to encourage Theuma to preserve whatever proof he possessed.