Jeweller cleared of falsely valuing diamond at Lm20,000

A jeweller has been cleared of making a false declaration when he issued a document certifying that a diamond was worth Lm20,000 when it was actually worth half the price.

Magistrate Audrey Demicoli heard how Charles Azzopardi, 53, of Attard had been charged with issuing a false certificate after his brother, a retired jeweller, asked him to do so.

In August 2004, Diana Grech filed a police report saying she felt she had been defrauded. She told the police she had met a certain Oliver Agius who told her he had a 2.84 carat diamond, of colour E, for sale. He told her the diamond was worth Lm20,000 but he would sell it to her for Lm12,000.

He then handed her a certification issued by Mr Azzopardi and she went on to purchase the diamond thinking she had just landed herself a bargain.

Some time later, Ms Grech started to doubt her purchase and took the diamond to another jeweller for an independent evaluation. She was told the diamond was of colour G/H and was worth between Lm10,000 and Lm12,000.

She called her lawyer who suggested she take the diamond back to Mr Azzopardi as he was known as a reputable jeweller. Ms Grech did so and when Mr Azzopardi evaluated the diamond he agreed it was worth between Lm10,000 and Lm12,000.

He recalled certifying her diamond and evaluating it at Lm20,850 and explained that he had done so because his brother Walter had asked him to. He explained that his brother had told him he had evaluated the diamond.

The woman explained that she believed and trusted Charles Azzopardi but felt betrayed by Mr Agius who sold her the diamond.

The magistrate heard how the prosecution, conducted by Police Inspector Angelo Gafà, demanded that Mr Azzopardi should be found guilty because he had issued the certificate without examining the rock and that constituted a false declaration.

But lawyers Joseph Giglio and Joseph Schembri for the accused argued that their client could not be found guilty as he did not have a criminal intent.

The magistrate agreed with the defence and noted that the fact that Mr Azzopardi issued the certificate was not sufficient for conviction. If anything, it was a breach of ethics, she said.

She noted that Mr Azzopardi had never declared that he personally examined the diamond and, apart from that, he relied on his brother who was also a jeweller and was experienced in the matter.

The prosecution had failed to prove that there was criminal intent and the magistrate cleared Mr Azzopardi of the charges brought against him.