The Malta Independent Online
Article published on 19 June 2012
Dr Philip Galea Farrugia criticised the defence of the defrocked priests found guilty of sexual abuse, for their personal attack against one of the victims, Lawrence Grech, against whom they were showing hatred.
Dr Galea Farrugia, and Dr Elaine Rizzo, are representing the attorney general in the appeal launched by the two priests, being heard by Mr Justice David Scicluna. Godwin Scerri and Carmel Pulis, the former priests, were last August sentenced to five years and six years in jail for the sexual abuse of boys who were living at Dar San Guzepp, Sta Venera.
Mr Pulis was found guilty of abusing nine boys, Mr Scerri of corrupting two boys.
Dr Galea Farrugia’s claim of hatred was strongly denied by Dr Giannella de Marco, who lodged the appeal with Dr Joseph Giglio. She said the application had been written tongue in cheek and with sarcasm.
Dr Galea Farrugia said it was not true that the alleged victims of abuse had agreed among themselves to plot against the former priests for money. In fact they were so genuine that in their testimony they recognised that the former priests had also done good with them.
Criticising the appeal, Dr Galea Farrugia said this almost alleged that Magistrate Saviour Demicoli had decided for guilt to please the public. It was true there were discrepancies in the victims’ testimony but the testimony was given in some cases after 18 years. Because the abuse had been committed more than once, it was impossible to remember the exact details of what had happened.
The fact that the victims recognised that the former priests had also done them good showed that they are credible and genuine. Dr Galea Farrugia said there was a tendency for vulnerable people to find themselves close to persons who abused them and the victims had a sense of anger and love about what had happened.
For the victims to ask for compensation for what had happened, Dr Galea Farrugia stated, did not mean that they were not credible in their testimony. Everyone can make a mistake but everyone has to submit to the law, including members of the clergy.
Dr Giglio, who preceded Dr Galea Farrugia, criticised the testimony of two of the victims in regard to Mr Scerri and Magistrate Demicoli for deciding the case by relying only on certain statements.
Mr Scerri had been found guilty of corrupting a minor but the court had not found him guilty of this corruption when he was responsible for looking after the children. Magistrate Demicoli had not believed the alleged victim when testifying that Mr Scerri looked after them. How true could it be when the same victim said the former priests would enter rooms where there were 10 children, to abuse them?
Dr Giglio said the victims had the opportunity to speak to social workers but never reported any abuse. The magistrates’ court had not taken into consideration the testimony of a foster parent who contradicted what another victim had said, reporting the victim telling her that he was happy at Dar San Gużepp and that the “fathers” loved him.
Dr Giglio said Mr Scerri had been abroad for a long time when the claimed abuse occurred, and there was nothing to conclude that Mr Scerri should be found guilty of corrupting a minor who claimed that Mr Scerri touched his genitals.
The case is to continue on 6 July when TV presenter Lou Bondi is to be called to confirm that he was the author of certain blogs about the case. Mr Bondi has said that one of the victims, Lawrence Grech, had lied to him more than once when he was helping him in the case, and that Mr Grech’s aim was to publicise the story to make money out of it, and had even tried to make money from the BBC.
____________________________
Court tried to discredit the accused – defence
timesofmalta.com
19 June 2012
Godwin Scerri. Right: Charles Pulis.
The magistrate who convicted two priests of child abuse was yesterday accused of having been selective in his appreciation of evidence by trying to discredit the men and making sure they were found guilty.
Defence lawyer Joseph Giglio questioned how Magistrate Saviour Demicoli could be morally convinced of the men’s guilt when the victims were contradictory and inconsistent in their testimony.
On the other hand, the lawyer from the Attorney General’s Office, Phillip Galea Farrugia, said that it was precisely the discrepancies that made the victims so believable.
The 11 boys had been subjected to abuse every day, 18 years before they testified, so it was obvious that they could not remember every single detail but rather the substance of what they were put through, Dr Galea Farrugia said.
The victims, who were then aged between 13 and 16, were resident at the St Joseph Home in St Venera when the abuse took place.
The two men were making their submissions on the appeals filed by the two priests, Godwin Scerri and Charles Pulis, both members of the Missionary Society of St Paul, who were sentenced to five and six years in prison respectively for the sexual abuse.
A third member of the same Order, Bro. Joseph Bonnett, who had been facing the same charges, passed away two years ago.
The sitting carried on from another on Friday which went ahead despite there being a bomb threat made at the court house.
Coincidentally, 10 minutes before the sitting went ahead yesterday, another bomb threat was made. Judge David Scicluna expressed his worry and said that he did not want to put people’s lives at risk, to which Dr Giglio thanked him for the concern and added that everyone who remained in court was taking responsibility for their own lives and he preferred to continue.
The judge said that bomb threats seemed to happen every time there was a sitting and he suspected that someone who had testified in this case might be to blame.
As the sitting got under way, Dr Giglio pointed out that, while one victim claimed that Mr Scerri had been one of his carers, this was not true because he was never in charge of any boys in care.
He said that he found it strange how Magistrate Demicoli could believe the victim about the abuse and find Mr Scerri guilty, and in the same breath acquit the priest of having committed the crime when he was the child’s guardian.
The magistrate had to take the evidence in its totality and not in part only. One of the victims claimed that the priest would go into the dormitory to either quieten down the boys or to abuse them.
He would correct boys who were being naughty and at the same time touch others intimately, which in his opinion, the lawyer said, was not plausible.
The same witness alleged that he was touched by Bro Bonnett while swimming in the sea when it resulted that Bro Bonnett did not know how to swim.
In another display of being selective in the evidence appreciated, the magistrate used Mr Scerri’s passport as proof that he was on the island when the abuse took place, when Mr Scerri denied he was on the island, Dr Giglio said.
The magistrate justified his position by saying that since there were two departure stamps on the passport, common sense dictated that he must have been on the island. On a closer inspection between those two dates he was also in another four countries during the period the victim claimed he was abused.
Referring to the testimony of another witness, the lawyer said the man had told the court he had tried to tell his social worker, when still a boy, about being sexually abused but she refused to listen to what he had to say. When the social worker testified, she categorically denied having refused to listen to him and said that he told her the opposite and was very happy at the home with the priests.
In rebuttal, the AG’s lawyer Dr Galea Farrugia said that the defence counsel had launched a personal and “ferocious” attack on the only victim to come forward, Lawrence Grech, adding that the allegations made against the magistrate could almost be defined as contempt.
He said that it was no secret there were discrepancies but that was obvious considering that the victims had testified 18 years after the crime. He added that it was also understandable how the victims could not remember precise details because it happened so often, so what was left were general details.
The appeal continues next month when television presenter Lou Bondí is meant to testify about a number of blog posts he had written concerning Mr Grech.
I hope and pray that Scerri is not going to manipulate his way out of his conviction. I always encourage people to attend court proceedings when they can, both to support the complainants, and also to understand what happens in the court room and how facts can be spun and twisted, hypothesis can suddenly be presented as fact, and how witnesses can be confused by a ‘skilled’ defence lawyer, and to get a handle on the tactics which are routinely employed by the defendant’s lawyers.