Court sitting focuses on evidence, cell data, footage of boat

The compilation of evidence against the three men accused of murdering journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia continued yesterday before Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit.

As has become the norm in this case, the accused – Vince Muscat and brothers Alfred and George Degiorgio – entered the courtroom amid a significant presence of prison officers.

Witness Keith Cutajar, an image expert, was first to take the stand. He had been tasked with comparing footage of Alfred Degiorgio’s boat, the Maya, taken in October and in November, ascertaining whether the same boat shown in all the footage.

There are two pieces of video footage which Keith Cutajar downloaded from the Transport Malta system which monitors sea vessels – one taken on 16 October 2017, the day of the murder, and the other in November 2017.

The prosecution said they had Transport Malta footage from 16 October and from 23 November, where the Maya is shown re-entering the port. It said it was requesting that an expert be appointed to compare the two pieces of Transport Malta footage to determine whether that from 16 October was that same as the one shown on 22 November. These can then be compared with a photo of the Maya, which is currently impounded by the police.

Asked by the court whether he was an expert of the various boat models, Cutajar said he was qualified to compare images, but was not a boat expert.

The defence argued that if the prosecution wanted to compare boats, then the comparison should not only be made between footage of the Maya, but between footage of all the boats which were out that day and captured by Transport Malta cameras.

The prosecution said this could be done, and it was now therefore requesting that, coupled with an expert on digital image analysis, an expert on boats also be appointed to compare all the boats out on the two days. It suggested Captain Reuben Lanfranco as a potential expert on boats who could be appointed.

The defence and prosecution eventually agreed that the timeframe which should be analysed on 16 October should be from 2.30pm to 3.30pm, with the car bomb which killed Caruana Galizia having been detonated at around 3.30pm

The court upheld the request and nominated experts Keith Cutajar and Captain Reuben Lanfranco to compare the said footage, including identifying all the boats which entered and left port between 2.30pm to 3.30pm on the date of the alleged crime, 16 October.

This footage then has to be compared with footage of the Maya on 23 November, also taken by Transport Malta, for which there is footage from 8am to 5pm. The clip showing the Maya within that time frame has to be extracted and then compared with the clip of the Maya on 16 October in the defined time frame.

Later in yesterday’s proceedings, Keith Cutajar, said he was exhibiting five forensic copies of a 6Tb drive which contained evidence gathered by EUROPOL.

Another witness, employed with Melita as a legal counsel, then took the stand. She submitted a CD with call, SMS text messages and internet data which took place on Melita cell towers in the vicinity of the area where the bomb was detonated. She said she had worked hand in hand with an engineer to obtain the data, due to its technical nature.

Asked by the defence who was making requests for data to Melita, the witness said it had first been court expert Martin Bajada, following which the requests came from the police.

Next to take the stand was Dr Anthony Bonnici, a Go plc official, who also presented a CD with data which was requested from the police.

The data includes cell tower data from the towers covering Bidnija and its proximity. It also includes information on IMEI phone numbers related to whether such phones, identified by their IMEIs, where used with a Go SIM card. Two IMEIs given by the police were found to have been used with Go SIM cards, while the other IMEIs were not used with such a SIM card in the last year, which is the maximum term allowed by law for such a match between an IMEI and a SIM card to be made.

The data was requested for the time-frames from 15 to 16 October 2017.

Bonnici explained, that, in rare cases, a mobile phone might not connect to the closest cell tower, identified by its Cell ID – such as in a case where the closest tower is undergoing maintenance, or if there is an obstacle between the phone and tower – and might instead connect to the next closest tower which is a longer distance away.

“We can never be 100 per cent sure that a particular mobile which is connected to a particular Cell ID is [physically] in the vicinity of that cell tower,” Bonnici said, when asked by the defence whether it was possible to say, without any doubt, whether a phone connected to a Cell ID had to definitely be within the coverage area of that tower.

Inspector Charlot Casha was next to give testimony. He had been appointed to take DNA mouth swabs of Alfred and George Degiorgio. He explained how he had followed all the required safety procedures, and taken swabs from Alfred Degiorgio’s mouth and placed it in a secure bag, later following the same procedure to take swabs from George Degiorgio.

The swabs in the bags where then passed on to the forensic lab for testing.

Casha said he was also assigned the task of returning to EUROPOL evidence which had been left in the forensic unit in Malta for safekeeping. This included burned electronic equipment found in a 45-gallon metal tank in Marsa.

He said that to carry out part of this task, he and expert Martin Bajada had to travel to the EUROPOL headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands, in March this year.

Around 90 items, which had been packed and sealed in evidence bags by EUROPOL and given to the Maltese exhibits officer on 8 December 2017, where then returned to EUROPOL on 11 March 2018. Each document was then checked by Marco Tolli from the EUROPOL, and it was confirmed that all documents were present and intact.

Asked by the defence what the Degiorgios had been told prior to their DNA swabs being taken, Casha said they had been told a DNA sample would be taken for the purpose of genetic profiling to check it against other DNA samples in the police database.

Inspector Clinton Vella then joined Inspector Casha on the stand.

Remnants of an extensively burnt mobile phone found in the wreckage of the burnt car Caruana Galizia had been gathered by Dutch police and taken to the Netherlands for analysis.

After the analysis, the package containing the burnt mobile phone was then sent by DHL courier post to Casha’s on 6 November 2017.

Once received, the package containing the phone was opened, and photos of it were taken by Vella. The package also contained a report on the work carried out by the Netherlands Forensic Institute on the piece of evidence.

A large number of boxes sealed with police evidence tape, containing evidence, were then brought in to the court room.

Police sergeant Patrick Grech and police officer Darren Debattista then joined Vella on the stand. The three of them were nominated to open all exhibits which had been lifted from the scene of the crime.

Debattista said the boxes contained all the evidence taken from the crime scene. They had been opened on 18 November in order for the objects to distinguish between those pertaining to the car which Caruana Galizia had been in, and those which were extraneous to it.

The court subsequently started going through the process of opening each of the many boxes, with those boxes containing evidence which was deemed to have nothing to do with the car itself being opened first. Vella then explained to the court what the evidence bags in the boxes contained.

At one point, the defence raised an argument when it emerged that some of the evidence bags which contained bits of electronic equipment contain a photo, which had been printed by the EUROPOL explosives expert Mario Cmarec, which is a depiction of the piece of equipment contained within the bag, but does not constitute evidence itself.

The defence asked the testifying police officers whether they knew where the expert had printed the photos from, and whether the photos were found on the internet, but they answered that Cmarec had not told them where he found the photos.

The defence argued that Cmarec had not been authorised to place within the evidence bag something which was not an item of proof lifted from the scene of the crime.

The prosecution, however, said a court expert had to have the freedom when it came to the methods used to undertake his duty. Moreover, it emphasised, the photos did not constitute part of the evidence.

After a substantial amount of time going through each box, the case was adjourned till October 11 and 12.

Legal aid Martin Fenech is assisting Vince Muscat. Lawyers William Cuschieri and Martha Muscat are representing Alfred Degiorgio. Legal aid Benjamin Valenzia is assisting George Degiorgio.