Submissions on punishment began on Wednesday in the trial of Lorin Scicluna, with the defence urging the court not to impose the maximum prison sentence following his client's conviction on two of nine charges.
The defence argued that Scicluna had already endured years of hardship while facing serious criminal accusations for offences of which a jury ultimately found him not guilty, insisting that his punishment should not be influenced by public outrage surrounding the verdict.
The former Armed Forces of Malta soldier was acquitted of seven of the nine charges he faced, including the murder of Lassane Cisse Souleymane and the attempted murders of Mohammed Jallow and Ibrahim Bah, who were shot at in Ħal Far on 6 April 2019.
Jurors returned not-guilty verdicts by eight votes to one on the murder and attempted murder charges, while Scicluna was found guilty of grievously injuring May Malimi in a separate incident on 1 February 2019 by six votes to three. He was also unanimously convicted of driving a vehicle without registration plates.
The verdict was delivered on Sunday evening following several hours of deliberations before Madam Justice Natasha Galea Sciberras.
Prosecutor Abigail Caruana Vella called for the maximum punishment permitted by law, including an effective prison sentence, citing the gravity of the hit-and-run incident. She described how the victim had been walking along the road, minding his own business, when he was struck by a vehicle with such force that its windscreen shattered.
The victim suffered serious bone fractures and other injuries, with medical evidence establishing that one of his broken bones required surgery involving metal implants and screws. The prosecutor also highlighted the victim had been abandoned following the collision without anyone stopping to assist him.
The prosecution described this racially motivated incident as shameful, insisting that such conduct had no place in Maltese society.
It also requested that a fine be imposed in relation to the driving licence contravention.
Defence warns against punishment driven by public outrage
Defence lawyer Edward Gatt strongly opposed the prosecution's request, arguing that the court's responsibility was to administer justice proportionately rather than respond to criticism of the jury's verdict.
"We are here to serve justice," Gatt told the court, insisting that the punishment must reflect the offence for which Scicluna had actually been convicted.
Gatt argued that the not-guilty verdicts should not become a reason to impose a harsher punishment on the remaining offences. He maintained that the court should not use sentencing as a means of compensating for the acquittals, particularly in response to public criticism surrounding the outcome of the trial.
Gatt also drew attention to the jury's six-to-three majority, arguing that although the court was not legally bound to consider the voting margin when determining punishment, it could nevertheless provide an indication of the jurors' assessment of the case.
Describing the outcome as "a very wise verdict", Gatt insisted that the narrow majority should be considered when determining an appropriate sentence.
Defence highlights years of hardship and cooperation with police
Gatt further urged the court to consider the difficulties Scicluna had experienced throughout the proceedings. He argued that the jury had cleared his client of involvement in the events of 6 April 2019, despite Scicluna having spent years facing accusations of murder and attempted murder. The lawyer questioned whether imposing the maximum punishment would be fair in light of the years his client had spent under the weight of those accusations.
The defence also highlighted that the February incident was never reported against Lorin Scicluna, adding that the victim's version stated that the hit-and-run happened on 3 February 2019, not 1 February. The defence also stated that the victim was even involved in a fight before flipping his version of events to say he was hit by a car. Gatt maintained that the seriousness of the offence had to be assessed on its own merits, rather than being overshadowed by the subsequent events.
He also referred to Scicluna's relatively clean criminal record, his respectful and cooperative behaviour during police investigations, and his compliance with bail conditions throughout the proceedings.
Gatt insisted that the law provided the court with discretion to impose a punishment within the prescribed minimum and maximum limits, arguing that the circumstances justified a sentence at the lower end of that range.
Throughout Wednesday's sitting, Scicluna appeared visibly upset and was seen crying as lawyers delivered their submissions. The court is expected to deliver its sentence on Thursday at 9am.
Attorney General Lawyers Darlene Grima, Abigail Caruana Vella and Michaela Aquilina prosecuted. Scicluna is being represented by lawyers Edward Gatt, Kris Busietta and Alessandro Farrugia.
Judge Natasha Galea Sciberras presided over the sitting.