Family of boat-yacht collision victim file judicial application
The family of the 81-year-old man who died after he was thrown overboard when his 14-foot fishing boat was involved in a collision with a sailing boat in Grand Harbour last month this morning filed a judicial application against the police commission for not taking action against the yachtsman.
Joseph Gatt died on July 12 some time after the accident in hospital.
Autopsy results two days later revealed that the cause of death was “asphyxia due to drowning”.
In their judicial application, Mr Gatt’s widow Josephine Gatt Baldacchino and the couple’s children Carmen, Martin, Joseph and Isabelle said that yachtsman John Zarb sailed his yacht over Mr Gatt’s body.
The family said the incident was investigated by the police, an inquiry was opened but even though a man was killed and the police knew who had committed the manslaughter they still did not take any action against Mr Zarb, even though almost two months have passed.
They said they were corresponding with the Valletta police through their lawyer who always said they were going to file charges.
This had not been done even though they charged other people on less serious crimes immediately.
Through the judicial application, the family asked the court to order the police commissionr to take action against Mr Zarb and file charges against him, including for the manslaughter of Joseph Gatt.
29 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Daniel Gatt Baldacchino
Sep 5th 2010, 21:43
I would like to clarify some things. First of all the 81 year old man is my grandfather, or may I say WAS my grandfather! For those who do not know, he has been fishing for the past 40 years. He previously owned a big luzzu and recently sold it and bought a smaller boat. On that day my grandfather was fishing minding his own business. His boat was at a standstill, and we are sure of such a thing because we have the key of his boat which were floating after the tragic accident as it was NOT in the ignition. The man of the yacht said he did not know what he hit! How could you not see a 14 foot boat which was at a standstill? Though I believe my grandfather did not break any laws : even if he did, should a truck ram through a car parked wrongly and kill anyone in it's path?! May I say no more and let his poor soul rest in peace, and let our family look at what's left of him: simply photos with his beloved family!!!
M.Grech
Sep 1st 2010, 18:23
I am very pleased that finally some actions are taking place against the driver of the yacht. It is about time that some justice is served and this will be a step closer towards peace of mind for the Gatt family. For all those who commented and said that there is no proof of negligence, I find that this statement is very offensive towards the family of Mr.Gatt and this also shows very poor imagination. It is clear that this was caused due to negligence by the driver of the yacht, if it was not negligence then the alternative is conscious murder, is it not? The yachtsman was recklessly driving his expensive yacht, I pray that some form of consolation is given to the Gatt family even though no form of justice can bring back what they lost. So far the proceedings have been horrible to say the least, everyday we hear about much smaller cases that result in much larger actions being taken then the ones taken for this one.
anthony dalli
Sep 2nd 2010, 13:49
this is not the jungle we are talking about here. Both parties have rules of the road to abide by - did you ever stop to consider that the smaller boat may have been in breech of said rules ? If a lorry and a small car crash of course the driver of the smaller car would suffer more but this does not necessarily make it the lorry driver's fault. The victm was 81 years old, perhaps, just perhaps, the error of judgenment was his ? perhaps he was fishing and strayed into the oncoming boats path ...who knows? Why manslaughter ? Accidents happen you know. It seems the crime to some here is the EXPENSIVE yacht ,recklessly driven ??? are you serious , this is a motor sailing boat - how reckless can you get at 8 knots !
Muscat Pat
Sep 1st 2010, 09:06
Mr Zarb is probably innocent but this is not the way to go about it. Friends of mine complain about the small boats fishing in and outside the breakwater of the Grand Harbour and Marsamxett. There is no place for small boats to ply from one side to the other without oberving the regulations, especially when larger boats and ships are restricted by space to manouever. But the question is there a political hidden hand that is applying the breaks somewhere?
J Micallef
Sep 1st 2010, 14:28
@ P Muscat
One day, when GonziPN gives us a break, I might be able to buy a large dream car. Then, I will start writing in blogs that the roads are no place for little cars to ply on, (like Marutis, Minis, Suzukis, Toyota IQs and Smarts, Subarus, Daihatsus and so on) since there is little space for big cars to manouvre.... How does that sound ?
Why was the yacht owner never charged with manslaughter anyway?
Stephen Baldacchino
Sep 1st 2010, 16:03
So from now on we keep our boats in the garage so that you with your yachts can have all the sea for your own. This is the cheery on the cake. just shut up please
Roderick Micallef
Sep 1st 2010, 07:05
I have a feeling that this judical application is simply a waste of time, in maritime law a sailing boat has always precedence so that alone is already enough. However this was clearly an accident which is very different from manslaughter, ok a person has died but the death was not due to any negligence as far as everybody knows. An inquiry was also done so I really can't understand what the family Gatt are pretending from the police.
Even the autopsy has confirmed that the cause of death was asphyxia due to drowning and that is once again surely not because of the yachtsman actions.
It is amazing that so many people are ready to point fingers at the police force without first knowing simple basic laws and procedures.
N. Bonnici
Sep 1st 2010, 13:33
"in maritime law a sailing boat has always precedence so that alone is already enough" - din tghodd anke meta andek yacht ghaddej fuq autopilot u d dghajsa l ohra kienet wieqfa? Mela jekk il yacht kien ghaddej fuq l autopilot u b nigligenza baqa diehel fid dghajsa bkonsegwenza li ghereq bniedem, allura qed tghid li tal yacht m ghandux tort?
Mark Muscat
Sep 1st 2010, 13:50
A sailing Yacht always has right of way if the boat is sailing with the sails up, not being driven manually or automatically. I very much doubt the sailing yacht was sailing with sails up though because this would obviously require a bigger crew than two people on board for the size of the boat in question, on the other hand the wind was extemely low on the day the accident occured.
Claire Busuttil
Sep 1st 2010, 00:24
It is the least they can do....they lost a loved person!
edward bartolo
Aug 31st 2010, 20:57
Quote: "There is a separetion between the government and the political parties."
ROFL
How can anything be separated from itself?! Enlighten me, please.
K. Mifsud
Aug 31st 2010, 17:18
It's all well to set out conspiracy theories. However, can we also mention the patently obvious possibility here?
Maybe the police concluded that there was absolutely no neglicence and that this was just an accident?
Manslaughter ('involontary homicide') is not when you kill somebody by accident. That is called 'an accident'. Manslaughter is when you kill somebody because you were negligent.
Though this is certainly a tragic incident, there have been no indications whatsover - at least in the media - that any negligence was involved.
MSciberras
Aug 31st 2010, 20:13
thats not the point. The point is that the police have not stated whether they are going or not going to file charges two months after the event. And if you know how police procedures work, this case stinks - from the early release of the boat less than two days after the accident to this two month delay. Even assuming that this was just an 'accident' (a collision between two boats on open water in good weather is rarely an accident) the mishandling of this whole case from the start is a disgrace, and shows how things are done by the malta police. It is hilarious how normal police procedures get jammed when high profile individuals are involved, be they priests accused of child abuse ('invsetigations not concluded after years and years) and now this farce. You need to know how police procedures work in Malta, especially the process whereby it is decided to prosecute or not, to feel real anger here. I never though i would say it, but this case is the clearest evidence yet that justice has more than one measure in Malta,
VICTOR BORG
Aug 31st 2010, 16:24
@A Zahra
Do you want to tell us that Malta is free of corrupt people.Its a very good excuse going back many
years when corruption is so rife and looking every one in the face.
Alex Wright
Aug 31st 2010, 14:14
For those of you that are 'CSI/NCIS' fans this must be a real mind-boggler. Why?
Given the nature of the case (out at sea scenrario) and the rather summary manner in which the scene of the crime was investigated it is obvious that someone did not do his job.
Sadly for the victim's family, if most of the relevant evidence was not (properly) collected at the time, then today it is way too late to make anything out of the situation.
Fellow bloggers chant the maxim found in Italian Courts of Law. I choose an Orwellian cliche: "All pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others".
Justice delayed is justice denied, but then again who said justice is to be delivered in Malta?
Bottom line - a man died and no one (save the family) really cares.
Now this is an issue the local Church may pick up, rather than the obsolete divorce babble.
On a lighter tone: how about launching a new series, CSI Malta (aka 'What not to do at a scene of the crime').
S. Farrugia
Aug 31st 2010, 12:56
This is really a sad news. The police didn't sue someone who unwillingly, killed a man. And they knew who the culprit was. the Malta Police is loosing credibility every day. We have policeman who don't know the meaning of law, let alone how to enforce it. this is really a pity.
K. Mifsud
Aug 31st 2010, 19:49
@S. Farrugia You obvioulsy do not know the difference between an accident (which is not a crime) and manslaughter (which is). With all due respect, it seems the person who doesn't know the law is you.
P. Gauci
Aug 31st 2010, 12:49
Just because a person carries out an act (whether of commission or omission) which results in misfortune, loss or unfortunately in this case tragedy, does not automatically mean that such person is taken to court. The very reason why an investigation by the Police and experts is carried out is to determine whether such person should be tried in the first place and if such person were to be tried what charges are to be brought against him.
Bear in mind that all the facts of the case are not known to all and more importantly a whole array of laws are to be considered. Therefore unless anyone of us can step forward and categorically state that they know all the facts of the case, have eliminated all 'grey' areas and are aware of all the applicable laws concerned, we should refrain from passing judgement on all parties concerned!
b.busuttil
Aug 31st 2010, 11:45
'La legge e uguale per tutti' ???????????
m vella
Aug 31st 2010, 11:58
'La legge e uguale per tutti' . LOL :)
Carmel Garcia
Aug 31st 2010, 11:19
Sewwa jghidu, il-forka ghal-izvinturat. Toqtol bniedem qisu ma gara xejn, u xi hadd jakkuzak b'xi haga biex inehhuk minn xi hatra biex jaghmlu l-haddiehor, jitolbu li jarrestawk u taghmel gurnata jinterrogawk u tispicca vittma ta' ghajdut biss biex ikissruk lilek u lil familja tieghek ghax ikollom ftit poter, Miskin iz-zghir dejjem, ghax dejjem hu qalaghha u bata biex jiekol.
Ahfrilhom Mulej ghax ma jafux x'inhuma jaghmlu.
Mary V. Galea
Aug 31st 2010, 10:58
I'm very glad Mr Joe Gatt's family is suing. They kept them waiting, too. And really, we all know the police should have sued first. Cannot Mr P. BORG OLIVIER GO AFTER THE Police too, if they're not doing their duty, instead of members of his own party? After all we are supposed to take for granted protection from the Police... and in such a glaring case, too!
Mark A. Sammut
Aug 31st 2010, 11:04
Take Police Protection for granted?!
Not in Malta.
vincent busuttil
Aug 31st 2010, 11:21
Please, do not mix thing up.
michael seychell
Aug 31st 2010, 11:26
Ms. Mary V. Galea - God forbid that a Secretary of a Political Party will start giving advise and or order or meddle with the work of the Police Corps.
Those are things of the past and I want to believe and hope that there will never be a repetition of such cases whether the PN, M/LP or AD will be in power.
Michael Seychell
Tal-Pieta
David Buttigieg
Aug 31st 2010, 12:08
@Mark Sammut
People who NEED protection get protection, but they at least have to ask!
Macho wannabees and crimminals carry guns around!
A. Zahra
Aug 31st 2010, 12:19
Dr. P Borg Olivier is the Secretary General of a political party. Even though his party is in government he has absolutely no authority over the police or any civil servant. Should he even try to tell the police what to do he would be committing a crime. There is a separetion between the government and the political parties. Unfortunately it was during the labour government 1971-1986 that the labour party started ordering civil servants, the army and the police about. As a result we had murders at police HQ, frame ups of innocent people and institutionalised corruption. Even certain well known ministers were corrupt. Do you want us to go back to those days.? I hope not.
a.taliana
Aug 31st 2010, 12:20
@ Mike
My friend, are they? Are you so certain? Nikki Dimech and Sandra Camilleri could tell us better.
What's the use of remembering the past if we ignore the present? I'm afraid our belief and hope is only leading us into disillusion.
John Micallef
Aug 31st 2010, 10:56
Mil- Hazin ghal ghar f'dan il- pajjiz.
Fis-60's kien itajjar pulizija waqt is-servizz li kien baqa mejjet. Ix-xufier tal- Karozza hawn min jinsisti sal- lum li kien mgharuf u gie mharrab min Malta biex ma titehidx azzjoni kontrih ghax kien xufier ta xi hadd mlehhaq fis-servizzi Inglizi..
Fl-2010 u ghaxra morna ghar, ghax il- Pulizija taf min hu u min hu responsabli ghadu barra jigri liberu minghajr lanqas biss gie mressaq.
Biss ironikament qarrib tieghi snin ilu tajjar tifel u sia it-tifel, shabu u sahansitra il- genituri tieghu amettew li kien it- tort tat-tifel. Imma le dan tressaq ta!!! u alla biss jaf kemm fadalu tila u nizel. BTW it- tifel brix kellu ta ma qatlux.