Public transport chief accused of defilement

charlie muscat

Oct 18th 2009, 08:44

aliex kullhadt qed jiprova jatti rugun lil din il persuna x emm hazin li isem ta xi hadt jigi imxandar mela mandkomx tfal intom? prosit magistrat li kellek il kurag u ixxandar isem il persuna .

ALISTAIR BUSUTTIL

Oct 18th 2009, 08:07

could this case have a connection with the process of the public transport tender,why are they naming him when he is not found guilty yet?

J. J. Borg

Oct 18th 2009, 02:16

D. Calleja: it-twegibiet tieghek huma kemm xejn fjakki specjalment ir-riferiment li int ghamilt ghal "nasba". Interessanti hafna li qed tishaq fuq il-possibilta ta' nasba ghal zewg ragunijiet. L-ewwel nett l-qisu trid jghid li l-akkuzat ghandha tkun it-tifla (ghax ma ninsewx li fuq tifla qed nitkellmu) u jekk veru gara li gara bil-fors li ghax speci "waqqat lill-akkuzat fid-dnub." It-tieni, il-kumment tieghek qisu jirrifletti ukoll l-attitudni li hadd ma jmissu jinstab hati ghax illum hu is-sur Spiteri u ghadha nista nkun jien. Jekk noqghodu sejrin hekk nistaw nghalqu il-qrati u il-magistrati johorgu bil-penzjoni.

john zammit

Oct 17th 2009, 21:19

At times I feel confused; surely everyone agrees that there is no relation between the number of 14 and 15 year old girls who become pregnant and the number of cases for difiling of minors. My question is, are these girls becoming pregnant without being defiled or registering the child as father unknown settles everything? But coming to this case, I agree that Mr. Spietri's name should not have been published. There were similar cases in the past when eventually it turned out that the girl made up the story; needless to say I am saying this without entering into the merits of the case as no evidence whatsoever is known.

d. calleja

Oct 17th 2009, 21:13

@jj borg. dan mhux il-kaz.. jekk ma tidholx fil-fond ma tistax tiggudika. jekk tkun gidba bhal ma naf tlett zaghzagh imsieken. min se jhallas tad-dbatija? flus lill-avukati b'ruxmata diferimenti. umiljazzjoni il-habs! tbattija tal-familja li zgur bla htija. hemm bzonn jinbidlu l-ligijiet u meta xi hadd johrog liberu jigi kumpensat mill-istat ghax huwa vittma. kullhadd jizbalja u kullhadd jista' jinbidel u jmur minn estrem ghall-iehor. min jaf forsi tidhol f;xi nasba int habib jew jien!!

Franco Farrugia

Oct 17th 2009, 19:29

@ Michael Neville Cassar: :-) That is precisely what I am trying to tell you - that your argument holds no water in this instance. Write when the verdict is out and have fun pinning up photos on the wall!

Michael Neville Cassar

Oct 17th 2009, 16:22

@Franco Farrugia Who is saying that the man has been found guilty? Read carefully before jumping to conclusion, all I am saying is those ones that are found guilty. And not the man in question.

J. J. Borg

Oct 17th 2009, 16:22

Everyone is innocent until proved guilty. But if I catch my neighbour stealing from my house, I would probably want to let my other neighbours know about him right away rather than wait to tell them until he is found guilty.

Franco Farrugia

Oct 17th 2009, 14:51

@ Michael Neville Cassar: And once again, I have to bring to your attention your lack of understanding of this matter. The man has NOT YET been found guilty and therefore, commonsense dictates, for those who have it, that the man in question MAY be found otherwise innocent and therefore, it is not right that a man's name is made public in such a situation. That is all that I am trying to point out. Please, read carefully!

Franco Farrugia

Oct 17th 2009, 14:42

@ Mark Mifsud Bonnici - I think I know my stuff very well enough without resorting to the need of you to tell me how to carry on with my profession, thank you!

Michael Neville Cassar

Oct 17th 2009, 14:20

A person is innocent until found guilty and his name should not be published there is no doubt about this. However families have to defend their children, from persons found guilty, it is beyond comprehension to understand the shock and trauma that young children suffer. Paedophiles should be published with their name and photo.

Peter Bonnici

Oct 17th 2009, 12:55

@ Franco Farrugia & Joseph Stafrace. You are both perfectly right. The Gozo gang rape case
seems to have been put away for ever. Funny that no action was taken against the lawyers who actually tried to bribe the victims family into silence either. And what about that Priest who somehow got himself involved?

Besides that, this alleged case of Spiteri is actually not surprising. I cannot understand how bus and van drivers are allowed to be left alone with children on school transport. They can not drive and control kids, and secondly, cases like this are sooner or later bound to arise. After years of transporting the same kids, some familiarity sets in, and whether by words or by actions, somebody will get seriously offended. The school must be responsible for providing at least one teacher per vehicle until the last pupil is off it.

N.Calleja

Oct 17th 2009, 12:38

This is a country of contradiction. If the name is published we say it should not be published. If it's not published we say it should be published! What do we really want?

G.Schembri

Oct 17th 2009, 12:24

@ MARK MIFSUD BONNICI maybe Franco Farrugia being a teacher remembers the not too distant past when a teacher at a private school was found guilty of child abuse and whose name was not published until some parents took it into their hands and started sending emails with his identity.
Or on the otherhand he might remember the story of a teacher whose life was ruined when he was falsly accused of defiling two girls.

Although Victor Spiteri has been charged he has not been found guilty, naming him could cause him a lot of trouble, what will happen if all this is a frame up, it does look a little fishy seeing that this all happened when the Public Transport Association is in the process of fighting for the rights of its members (be they wrong or right)

MARK MIFSUD BONNICI

Oct 17th 2009, 11:00

Franco Farrugia

It might be worth your while, considering your constant contact with children as a teacher, to refrain from defending a possible monster.

Do you doubt that the Magistrates decision to publish this persons name follwing what the girl must have testified.

JosephStafrace

Oct 17th 2009, 10:56

@Franco Farrugia. I fully agree with you. Although I am in no way condoning child abuse, I believe that we should let the court decide on the case and only then the accused name is mentioned in the press. Roumers are going around about a man falsely accused of child rape who couldn't bear the pressure and commited sucide. It later transpired that he was unjustly accused. The courts should follow an uniform line of action and ban the name of the accused until found guilty.

Joseph Schembri

Oct 17th 2009, 10:40

It is indeed sad that in our country, unlike some other EU members, publication of names of the presumed innocent is still allowed.

Meanwhile it is pertinent to point out that most of this man's accusations could not have been made in many other EU states like for example Italy, where the age of consent is much lower than our ridiculously high 18.

Franco Farrugia

Oct 17th 2009, 10:07

I find it disgusting that anyone being accused - and not yet having been found guilty! - of such a thing is named and shamed in the media! It is intolerable and I find it immoral.

Or is this because he is the man he is?

I recall that some time ago, there was a worse case in Gozo and the names had not been made public for some time!