Live – Police seized only devices pointed out by Keith Schembri, Yorgen Fenech trial hears
Police officers searching Keith Schembri’s Mellieħa home in the aftermath of the Daphne Caruana Galizia murder investigation only seized electronic devices identified by Schembri himself, after receiving instructions from a senior police officer, the jury hearing Yorgen Fenech’s murder trial was told on Monday.
Yorgen Fenech, a businessman, has pleaded not guilty to two principal charges: complicity in the wilful homicide of Daphne Caruana Galizia and criminal association to commit the murder.
Caruana Galizia, a columnist with The Malta Independent, was killed in a car bomb on 16 October, 2017.
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.
Judge Edwina Grima is presiding.
Please refresh for updates
17:54: That concludes Monday’s sitting.
Thank you for following this liveblog.
We will be publishing a summary of today’s sitting shortly.
17:53: The next witness is Joseph Mallia who tells the court he spent 20 years in the forensic unit specialising in fingerprints and calligraphy.
Prosecutor Godwin Cini makes reference to a report in which the witness was tasked to document the fingerprints of Keith Schembri and Adrian Vella.
He explains that his role was to elevate fingerprints and palm prints
The defence asks how many valid fingerprints were found, to which the witness replies “45.”
“The fact that you don’t find valid fingerprints doesn’t exclude that the person did not touch the item, correct?”
“Correct,” answers the witness.
17:26: The witness turns to other reports referring to the DNA analyses of blood samples, car parts, and clothes among other things as well as a comparison with the victim’s DNA profiles.
Another report features the findings of the DNA evidence on the cigarette butts retrieved from the Bidnija lookout spot.
DNA findings of the samples taken include the names of Daphne Caruana Galizia as well as Alfred and George Degiorgio.
17:09: Cassar tells the jury she has been a court expert since 2007, explaining that she analyses body fluids and DNA.
The prosecution makes reference to a report, noting she was tasked to confirm the identity of the victim’s corpse. She then compared the DNA of the body to that of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s son Paul.
Prosecution makes reference to another report where she was tasked to analyse a stamp, and an envelope flap to get a DNA profile of any fluids left on them.
16:59: DNA expert Dr Marisa Cassar is next to testify.
16:45 The jury (J) has a question for the witness, former scene of crime officer Mario Azzopardi (MA).
J: “In the report written by yourself and your colleague, you wrote that ‘We did everything in the best of our ability.’ In your experience, how did you feel after this search? Did you speak to any of your colleagues about it?”
The court interrupts, saying that Azzopardi’s opinions cannot be used as evidence.
J: “So, when you left the search, did you and your colleague Michelle speak about the situation, since it was different to what you were used to?”
MA: “To be honest, I don’t remember, but my mind was more focused on the devices at hand.”
This brings a close to Azzopardi’s testimony.
16:41 Defence lawyer Giannella De Marco (GDM) makes reference to a previous testimony given by Mario Azzopardi (MA) during the compilation of evidence.
She reads out loud to the court what Azzopardi had said to the inquiring magistrate: “We did not conduct any searches; we just took what Schembri told us to take.”
GDM: “Is this how scene of crime officers usually conduct a search?”
MA: “No, we don’t do it like that.”
De Marco exhibits the photos showing the two mobile phones from earlier in the day, and Azzopardi confirms that the devices were not seized.
16:37 Defence lawyer Giannella De Marco (GDM) begins cross-examining former scene of crime officer Mario Azzopardi (MA).
GDM: “Have the lawyers of a suspect ever accompanied you to a house search?”
MA: “That was the only time in my 19 years [of working in the police force] that lawyers have ever accompanied us to a house search.”
GDM: “Do we agree that you only took those devices that were indicated to you by Schembri?”
MA: “Yes, that’s correct. He would point at the items and we would take those.”
16:33 Azzopardi also recalls an unmarked nine-seater van used to transport everyone involved to the search of Keith Schembri’s residence.
The prosecution questions the reasoning behind choosing an unmarked police vehicle for the search.
“I assume not to alert the media,” Azzopardi says.
16:30 Forensic expert PS Mario Azzopardi takes the stand.
Azzopardi has 19 years of experience in the police force. At the time of the investigation, he was a scene of crime officer (SOCO). Today, he is a forensic expert.
Together with Michelle Camilleri, Azzopardi was present on 26 November 2019 during the search of Keith Schembri’s phone.
He recalls that, at 1:20pm that day, Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud instructed him to conduct a house search of Keith Schembri’s Mellieħa residence.
As his colleague previously testified, Azzopardi confirmed that Keith Schembri was on site during the search, along with his lawyers, his mother, his father, his eldest daughter, his wife, and Neville Gafa.
Officers asked for instructions on how to carry out the search. Late police officer Alex Taliana explained that Arnaud’s orders were to seize any devices indicated to them by Schembri.
Azzopardi details the exact items seized, being a Dell laptop found in the living room, two MacBook Airs belonging to his children, and an Asus tablet found on the bedside table of the bedroom.
The officers also took photos of the scene.
On 10 February 2020, officers gave a copy of the photos to Arnaud.
16:10: The next witness is document examination expert Sean Pace, who is also testifying via videoconference.
In 2019, Pace was stationed as an expert in the national document examination unit. In this role, his task was to examine all sorts of documents, ranging from passports to written text.
The prosecution makes reference to a report.
During the investigation, Pace explains that he was tasked to analysed hidden writing evidence. This happens when writing is legible over the actual document being written on and, with the pressure of the pen onto the original document, writing is indented and transferred onto the second page. As a result, investigators are left with a new paper with the indented marks of the writing found in the original document.
Pace says he was given envelopes by the court, which each enclosed two bathes of paper. One of these batches had five papers, while the other had two pages stapled together.
Pace found handwriting on these papers, as well as printed writing. He removed the staple and photographed the page from the front and back. From there, he began examining whether the handwritten paper contained hidden writing.
He made use of an electrostatic machine, which is able to show writing that otherwise may have remained hidden or invisible. An infra-red UV and other forms of rays to find any possible hidden writing.
It was found that writing written on the first page had marked onto the second, third, and fourth papers.
Pace explains that this does not necessarily indicate new evidence since these papers did not include anything which was not found on the original document. The second batch also did not contain any new information.
15:30 The prosecution makes reference to a report.
The witness explains that he carried out the same extraction task on devices seized from a residence in Portomaso.
The prosecution makes reference to four other reports, but the witness clarifies that he did not draw up any of these reports. Therefore, he says, he cannot testify on their contents.
The prosecution thanks Totaro for his cooperation and has no further questions.
That concludes his testimony.
15:22 Totaro begins describing his role in the investigation.
As a digital forensic examiner, Totaro was tasked to undergo forensic extraction from the seized devices using a secure Europol system. He carried out the extractions in Malta.
He explains that several devices were seized on 20 November 2019 from the cabin cruiser named Gio found in the Portomaso marina.
The content extracted from these devices were stored in three sets of hard-drives, which were then delivered to Maltese courts.
15:09 The judge and jurors return to Hall 22.
Europol Senior Specialist Forensic Examiner Giuseppe Totaro will testify through a videoconference.
At the time of the case, Totaro was a digital forensic expert.
13:11 That brings an end to Scene of Crime Officer Michelle Camilleri’s testimony.
The court is now taking a break.
13:09 Defence lawyer Giannella De Marco (GDM) begins cross-examining Scene of Crime Officer Michelle Camilleri (MC).
GDM: “You said you didn’t know why you were going to search the residence. Usually you would know, right?”
MC: “Yes, usually we would know.”
GDM: “And usually you go with your actual police cars, but during this one you went with incognito vans.”
MC: “Yes, I agree.”
GDM: “And usually lawyers don’t accompany the suspected person to a house search, but they were present for this ‘secret’ search, right?”
MC: “Yes, it doesn’t usually happen.”
GDM: “So, what happened?”
MC: “My colleague called Keith Arnaud for proper instructions because we were confused. He told us to only take those items indicated to us by Schembri.”
GDM: “So, Schembri told you to take his children’s laptop, an old Dell laptop found in the living room, and an Asus tablet that doesn’t even work without the charger?”
MC: “Yes.”
The court is shown photos of the house in which phones are clearly visible on a table.
GDM: “And these mobiles were not seized during the search?”
MC: “We didn’t pick them up because they were not indicated to us by Schembri.”
12:53: Scene of Crime Officer Michelle Camilleri is next to testify.
Camilleri recalls that, on 26 November 2019, she was instructed to conduct a search of a home in Mellieħa’s Santa Marija Estate. Keith Schembri was present during the search, along with his ex-wife, one of his children, and Neville Gafa.
The officers had been sent to gather electronic devices from Schembri’s home.
Camilleri says that Assistant Police Commissioner Keith Arnaud told the officers to only collect the devices given to them by Schembri. The witness tells the court that these items included two laptops belonging to his daughters. An iPad found on Schembri’s bedside table was also taken.
The courtroom is shown photos of Schembri’s property, each numbered to indicate the number of electronic devices seized. Further images were shown of one of the laptops they were given by Schembri.
11:40 The testimony continues, but the media cannot report what is being said.
10.38 The head of the Malta Security Service is tetifying behind closed doors at the request of prosecutors.
10:33 A separate report compiled after the extractions details a total of 21 exhibits seized from the Portomaso marina. Investigators underwent forensic extraction of the devices.
Another report was put together following items seized during an extraction on Level 21 of the Portomaso Business Tower.
The jurors ask the witness to indicate the relevant page of the document.
On this page, the report says that a phone was found to have been restored to factory settings.
“Was it a brand-new phone or could there have been information on it before it was reset,” the jury asks. “Could you be able to tell if it was new or not? Is there a new technology that can do this?”
Here, the court interrupts, explaining that it does not matter if new technology exists to determine whether or not the phone was new.
“This is the evidence we have, and this is what we have to use today,” the judge says.
The witness continues by adding that it is entirely possible that data previously existed on the device before being restored to factory settings, but there are no ways for experts to determine this.
10:19 The next witness is Europol Expert Israel Cordillo Torres. At the time of the investigation, Cordillo Torres was an ex-computer forensic expert for Europol. He is now a senior specialist forensic examiner.
Cordillo Torres has extensive experience working in computer forensics and computer science. He had been working on the case since its start.
Prosecutor Godwin Cini refers to a report made during the compilation of evidence.
The witness explains that he was appointed as a forensic examiner to support Maltese authorities working on items seized from each of Fenech’s properties.
“My role was just to extract the information,” Cordillo Torres tells the court. “We were tasked to extract any available information.”
He explains that seven devices were seized from Office 4 on Level 3 of the Portomaso Business Centre in St Julian’s.
These devices are referred to as ‘exhibits.’
10:06 After that somewhat confusing testimony, Europol forensic examiner Dennis Petrou is next to testify..
Petru was responsible for extracting data from devices seized from Portomaso and Tumas Group offices.
Petrou worked at Europol between 2013 and 2021.
The witness begins detailing Europol’s ‘Operation Blue Elephant Malta, Portomaso Business Towers.’ During this operation, a number of items were seized from a corporate office, a meeting room and a secretary’s office in Portomaso Business Towers.
The items seized were:
- A laptop
- A hard-drive
- A Bluetooth device
- A laptop charger
Petrou also recalls certain details about the laptop, mentioning that its keyboard was found to be damaged.
Prosecutor Godwin Cini refers to a document which states that Petrou had extracted the data from the laptop himself.
9:55 Defence lawyer Giannella de Marco asks the witness about the content found in the pen-drive.
Calafato Testa confirms it was related to the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, including recorded or transcribed conversations. It also appeared that an Italian person was involved in discussions on the murder.
The witness reads a transcript taken from the pen drive along with the note which accompanied it. The note was written in Italian.
The transcript mentioned businessman Alex Azzopardi and Mario Fava, who was a political consultant for the former prime minister Joseph Muscat.
In the note, the Italian prosecutor elaborates that Azzopardi paid €35,000 through Mario Fava to initiate the process of murdering Caruana Galizia.
According to the Italian prosecutor, another €4 million would allegedly be paid out to carry out the assassination.
09:41 Monday’s first witness is Stephania Calafato Testa, the court assistant registrar.
The prosecution begins by asking Calafato Testa about her connection to the investigation.
The witness explains that, in 2021, she had received an important note from the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (EUROJUST) through a prosecutor in Italy. Attached to this note was a pen-drive, which was later presented to the Maltese courts.
However, at the time, investigators faced issues to access the pen-drive’s content, which proved inaccessible to them. It was found that this was an encrypted pen drive and required a password in order to access its content.
Consequently, the pen-drive was sent back to EUROJUST, where it was given a new password and then sent back to Malta.
9:22 Judge Edwina Grima and jurors enter the court room and take their seats.
RSS Feed Source: Independent Malta Live – Police seized only devices pointed out by Keith Schembri, Yorgen Fenech trial hears