Malta's OJ Simpson

What we have witnessed is worthy of a Netflix series. Like OJ Simpson, Yorgen Fenech was seen as guilty by everyone but not by the people that counted–the jury. What is clear is the Attorney Generals Office needs to be reformed to the extent the prosecution turns to seasoned lawyers from the private sector who are contracted to carry out crucial prosecutions, and not budding lawyers or armchair prosecutors who have not been battle tried. Let me declare from the onset that if I were a juror, I would be very disappointed with the depositions of many of the witnesses, but more with the prosecution, which I found unappealing and boring. But, nevertheless I would still cast my decision and find Yorgen Fenech guilty as hell on two counts. I have remained silent during this jury case and opted not to write at all. I did this for two reasons. The first because I knew selective chats where I am an active interlocutor would be exhumed in court. They had already been leaked years back by Jason Azzopardi to a particular blog website. The second reason I chose not to write was because I was also listed as a main witness by the Yorgen Fenech defence team, but not called up at the last minute. This was probably because what I had to say was not beneficial to the Yorgen Fenech cause. But this column is not about me, but rather about the failure of the Maltese police and the Attorney General's Office to bring to justice a person who was behind the murder and an accomplice to a murder. But to understand what really happened in the last 55 days or more, one needs to stop for a few minutes and disengage from all the noise and think objectively. If no one really minds, I am going to tell it as it is. To start with, we must remember that the jurors were selected from the general public. Many people did not share the emotional sorrow for Daphne Caruana Galizia, and I am sure the jurors picked probably reflected this. It is hard for me to say it, but Caruana Galizia, for all her courage and intrepid journalism, was not liked by many Maltese, who saw her as a gossip monger and too personal in her writings. The prosecution seems to have forgotten this point. I also think certain pick-and-choose facts presented to the jury mirrored too much of an obsessive agenda by the Caruana Galizia lawyers with the fact that anyone dealing with Fenech in the past was as guilty as hell. Revealing chats which had nothing to do with the murder did not go down well with the jurors. Below I have listed a number of reasons which I believe led to Yorgen Fenech walking away from court on Wednesday a free man: 1. The idea that justice was something for the family only, is wrong. Seeing justice in this case is a must for society in general. The family were the victims and are crying for justice, but so is Malta. A just and fair society calls out for benchmarks, and that translates into one high standard that clearly demands the perpetrators of this heinous murder must be punished for their actions. 2. The prosecution was led by uncharismatic prosecutors. They were also boring to listen to, and far too obsessed with emulating the style of one of the defence counsels–Jason Azzopardi. 3. On the other hand, the Yorgen Fenech defence team was charismatic, relentless, emotional and managed to sow doubt among the jurors. They managed to redirect focus on the pivotal role of Keith Schembri as the potential mastermind of the murder. 4. The police, especially Assistant Commissioner Keith Arnaud, could not explain why they had treated Keith Schembri with kid's gloves. Neither could they explain how Schembri's mobile was never found just minutes before the police raid. 5. Melvin Theuma, the middleman in this heinous murder, was given a presidential pardon but did not impress. He was still seen as a super criminal, and was not credible enough to convince the jurors he had not selectively withheld tapes and discarded others which could have implicated Keith Schembri. He was also too anxious to admit he had changed his version when questioned about changes in depositions. 6. There was no explanation as to why the masterminds of the first plot to kill Caruana Galizia were not investigated by the police. 7. And if there is any truth that a survey was commissioned that could have targeted potential jurors, then there is really a case for a mistrial. Judge Edwina Grima should have asked pollster Vince Marmarà for the telephone numbers of people contacted to see if they tallied with the same telephone numbers of the individuals noted as potential jurors in the court notice published in the Government Gazette on 5 May 2026, a month before the survey was carried out. 8. No one could understand why Daphne Caruana Galizia's son Matthew, was so aggressive in dismissing Keith Schembri's role as a potential accomplice to the plot's masterminding. Robert Abela and the ramifications he faces When on Wednesday evening the juror's decision was announced, it was clear that something was going to break. The ramifications on Prime Minister Robert Abela will not be small. The gravity of the situation will slow him down and may drag his government away from its own challenges and bog him down. One must see if Opposition leader Alex Borg on the other hand will take advantage of the situation without souring the public's view of the PN as a negative party. On the other hand, the implications of this acquittals turn all the guns on Keith Schembri, who, on a recent chat with a loud hailer TV host boasted about his frequent conversations with Robert Abela. If there was ever anytime to erase this man from any political circle linked to the corridors of Castille, now is the time. It is bad enough Schembri effectively ruled the country and the Labour government between 2013 and 2019. When this country prayed for closure, the exact opposite happened; a festering wound suddenly opened again and with it a swarm of flies eager to feast on the pus and decaying meat. *** Life goes on Last week I presented an ambitious blueprint for what is needed in the country and an appeal for some decision making in the country. I also remarked that not every decision depends on the government, though there is no doubt that the government needs to set the tone. And if there is yet another issue that needs to be tackled, the village feasts that dominate our lives whether we like it or not needs to be tackled once and for all. I will make a disclaimer and state I have a vested interest. I do not hate feasts but detest the fact towns and villages are cordoned off and traffic diverted for days before the feast itself. To make matters worse Transport Malta, the local council and the police seem to have a mission not to coordinate, and allow road works or road closures to take place at the same week before the feast. The result are traffic jams, gridlocks and irritated motorists. St Julian's and Naxxar were two localities I experience personally, and the amount of time motorists have wasted navigating through this mess is simply unbelievable. This was all a result of authorities failing to think when they issued permits for feasts and roadworks. And this is just the traffic. Not to mention the exaggerated obsession with fireworks at all times of the day, relentless noise next to old people's homes and communities, and external feast activities with outside recreation, excessive lighting and tonnes of waste in the village squares. The tolerance for this anarchy is symptomatic of our political class that believe most of the public want these feasts and should be left to have a good time. Of course, the silent majority who abhor these extremes do not count at all. On this subject, there is another player that needs to intervene, and in all his wisdom and self-righteousness has failed to utter a single word. I am referring to the archbishop himself. He tends to argue that he has no control over feasts. He could start by expressing an opinion, more so since he has an opinion about nearly everything. He could talk about the need to trim the length of feast days and for the need to consider cutting down on fireworks most especially if there are old people's homes nearby. He could also go further and beyond preaching about the environment talk of limiting lighting on church facades. Charles Scicluna should also perhaps pass a comment about the waste that is generated. It is so easy to preach about the need to get our act together, but so difficult to take the first step and do something about it. It seems everyone thinks that there is no tomorrow… not just the government.