
Thursday, 21st August 2008 - 18:05CET
Hotel manager accused of defiling boy
The manager of a five-star hotel has been granted bail against a deposit of €1,000 and a personal guarantee of €1,000 after pleading not guilty to defiling a 14-year-old boy.
The man, who cannot be named by court order to protect the identity of the alleged victim had allegedly committed the crime in Msida and other places around Malta.
The man allegedly defiled the boy and participated in other sexual acts with him.







RSS
Comments
On the contrary, his name should be published as this may inspire other victims of his (if any) to come forward.
And what a ridiculous amount of money for a guarantee !! Its probably cheaper than procuring the sexual services of a prostitute.
the same thing if one mention an accused as being a coloured person. we say that we are racist.
The alleged homosexual paedophile should have looked for a consenting adult partner.
@Mr Schembri how can you tell if this child was forced or not?? From a article with 5 sentences???? You must be psychic.
Luckily for us we happen to live in a place on Earth (Europe) which is very atypical of most other places on this planet. It has taken us centuries to arrive at this level of civilisation. I find that there is still much to be done. Now some of you want to resort 'il qrati tal poplu' as made notorious by KMB in the 80s!
After all, persons who are accused of other crimes are readily mentioned by name in the media, even if their guilt has not yet been proven.
No one is stating that homosexuals are paedophiles .Guze' wanted to be specific.
I believe that for a 14 year old boy it is far more a traumatic experience with a male adult then with a woman. Mind you I consider both actions to be wrong.
Up to this stage I believe that names should not be published. What if the accused person is found to be innocent?
@ John Camilleri : the journalist gave you all the information s/he could without breaching the court order.It is up to us as parents to keep on the lookout.
What was the hotel manager's previous occupation? Religion teacher at a private school? - Just asking!
This is precisely why the names of paedophiles should be made public. People (especially caregivers/parents and the children themselves) have a right to know who these people are.
Using the excuse of not naming the "to protect the identity of the victims" only serves to create more such victims in the long-run.
The name of this person should be released when convicted as should the names of other pedoephiles that have already been convicted, like they do in the rest of the world. This is an exsisting problem in Malta and should be faced not letting these people go with a slap on their wrist free to wander the streets as if they have never done anything.... A pedoephile is worse than a murderer as he has ruined a childs life and his or her upcoming adult hood having to live not knowing who to trust and with memories of what was done to him or her.
But if he is proved guilty than he should be tagged and marked on sex offender list.
Other people who have children has the right to know where to send their children.
.
When will Malta start treating child molestors as the beasts that they are and impose the harshest of sentences on these scumbags? How about that Sex Offenders Register? Isn't it time that Malta joins the rest of the civilized world in protecting its law-abiding citizens?
Bill Millam
Los Angeles
Completely disagree with you at this stage. The man is ACCUSED, not CONVICTED of this crime. At this point, disclosure of the name of the accused would only serve to destroy his life and even he's innocent it would be too late.
I don't believe in this 'protection of the victim' standard excuse for ordering a ban on publication. More often than not it protects the perpetrator. If he's found guilty, only THEN, as a citizen and a father, I expect to know who this sicko is.
@Charles Micallef. I see your point though and the disclosure of the accused's occupation is rather unfortunate. All the more reason for the authorities to disclose the identity of the perpetrator if found guilty.
Meanwhile I agree with the contrast underlined by Victor Vella earlier on in the contrast with which some issues are treated (compare name and shame for a VAT omission with this!)
Any way the fact that the perpetrator is taken to court is no confirmation of guilt 'per se'.
@ E Bajada - They keep the accused's name quiet because he is just that, until further notice: AN ACCUSED. NOT FOUND GUILTY. Kapixx?????
And if you want to protect your children, you jolly well know what you should do!
Who is going to restore his reputation and standing in society.
I believe that until one is proven guilty (and this not only in sexual cases) one's identity should be protected.
I'm sure that all those who are crying out for blood would agree with me if the accused happens to be a member of their own family. I know. I have met quite a few people like this.
First of all, the man has not yet been found guilty... that is for the court to decide and not for any of the readers. People seem to be so quick at condemning other people as if they have no skeletons in their own closets. It's a good thing justice is not left in your hands guys as you would burn anyone rumoured to have committed a crime at the stake without even giving them a fair trial! Indeed I think the names of people accused of ANY crime should never be revealed until they are found guilty, as people tend to label them criminals anyway, irrespective of the court's decision!
Secondly, if you care the least about the alleged victim, then you wouldn't find it hard to understand why the name of the accused is not revealed. In a country where everyone knows everyone else, the name of the accused can often lead to identifying the victim, and the last thing a victim of sexual abuse would want is to have all Malta know that he's been abused!
Since the accused MAN has been brought to court over sexual congress charges on an underaged BOY... a HOMOSEXUAL PAEDOPHILE title is very adequate to this adult male if he is found guilty.
Political Correctness be damned !!
@ guze xerri - 'Who is this homosexual paedophile?' he asks. Do I note a hint of accent on the fourth word? Is there some message you want to impart? Some homophobia, perhaps?
Not all homosexuals are paedophiles as not all paedophiles are homosexuals!
What a fine specimen of management!!!!!!!
the public has the right to know who this vile man is.
How about the other boys who might visit the hotel in the future? And how can naming the hotelier's name reveal who the boy might be?
And if the hotel manager 'allegedly defiled the boy AND PARTICIPATED IN OTHER SEXUAL ACTS WITH HIM' how come the title says that the hotel manager was 'accused of defiling boy'?