Lead investigator’s cross-examination during Yorgen Fenech trial draws to a close with questions from jury

Lead police investigator Keith Arnaud’s cross-examination in the Yorgen Fenech trial drew to a close on Wednesday morning, before jurors put their own questions to the assistant commissioner on Keith Schembri, Melvin Theuma’s phantom job, and the searches carried out after Schembri’s arrest.

Arnaud, the head of the police major crimes unit, was testifying for the fifth sitting in Fenech’s trial by jury over the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Fenech stands charged with complicity in Caruana Galizia’s voluntary homicide and criminal association. He denies the charges.

Defence lawyer Giannella de Marco resumed her cross-examination by questioning Arnaud about former police commissioner Lawrence Cutajar, alleged leaks from the investigation, and whether police had seized or investigated Cutajar’s phone.

Arnaud said there was no legal justification to seize Cutajar’s phone and that the inquiring magistrate handling the leaks inquiry had not ordered such a seizure. He said he and Inspector Kurt Zahra had informed their superiors as soon as they became aware of “blatant” leaks and had asked for an investigation.

He said, however, that he did not investigate the leaks himself and that decisions about what to do with them were not his to make.

The defence also revisited claims involving Chris Cardona, David Gatt and the Degiorgio brothers, including whether police had seized Cardona’s phone or interrogated him again.

Arnaud said that Cardona had been interrogated in November 2019 and reiterated that all evidence linking any person to the murder was followed up and acted upon.

Madam Justice Edwina Grima intervened more than once during the morning sitting, reminding both the witness and the defence that cross-examination must remain a sequence of questions and answers, not arguments between themselves.

The defence brought up the victim’s laptop again, with Arnaud repeating that police had liaised directly with Matthew Caruana Galizia on its contents after the family refused to give investigators access to the device.

De Marco also questioned Arnaud on his communications with Schembri and whether he had “deferred” to him, quoting an exchange between Schembri and businessman Johann Cremona in which Schembri described Arnaud as someone who had shown integrity when dealing with him.

Arnaud replied that Schembri was the prime minister’s chief of staff at the time and that he addressed him accordingly, rejecting the suggestion that he had somehow fallen short of looking into him as a suspect.

He further defended his approach by saying that investigating a suspect did not mean mistreating them was required. Even people he later charged with serious crimes, he said, were treated properly when they needed to speak to him from prison.

After the cross-examination ended, prosecutor Godwin Cini briefly re-examined Arnaud. Asked about references to Caruana Galizia’s laptop in recordings between Theuma and Fenech, Arnaud said Fenech had told Theuma it would be better if the laptop’s contents were made public because this would help “confuse” the public about what was happening and who the key suspect was.

Jurors were then allowed to ask Arnaud questions about his lengthy testimony.

One juror asked about Theuma’s presidential pardon and whether he had been required to give information about any income generated from the murder. Arnaud said this condition was intended to assess Theuma’s role and whether he had directly benefited. Investigators found no evidence that he had, he said.

Asked why Theuma kept a photo of himself with Schembri in the ice cream box containing his recordings, Arnaud reiterated that Theuma believed Fenech and Schembri wanted to eliminate him after they promised bail for the Degiorgio brothers and left them all hanging instead.

Jurors also asked about Theuma’s phantom government job. Arnaud said this became the subject of a separate parallel investigation. He said Schembri had claimed that Theuma met him at Castille before the 2017 election and that such meetings were normal at the time.

According to Arnaud, Theuma told police that Fenech had said Castille would call him up to give him a job. Shortly after ending the call with Fenech, Theuma received an appointment from Castille. Theuma did not want or need the job, Arnaud said, but simply shrugged it off and accepted the paycheque.

Another juror asked why only two police officers went to Schembri’s home and why his Castille office was not searched immediately.

Arnaud said the night of 25 November 2019 brought in a large amount of information at great speed. He and Zahra decided to continue acting through the night rather than wait until the following morning, noting they were the only two officials who stayed focused on the mission while the rest of the team was allowed to rest at home.

“The Castille search didn’t happen there and then,” Arnaud said. “It could have happened there and then, but it didn’t.”

The trial continues.