Sabrina Agius seeks police investigation into e-mails case
Sabrina Agius
RTK journalist Sabrina Agius has asked the Commissioner of Police to investigate how copies of e-mail between her and Opposition leader Joseph Muscat were taken from her computer.
The request was made on Ms Agius's behalf by lawyers Emanuel Mallia and Arthur Azzopardi in terms of the criminal code on computer misuse.
The lawyers pointed out that Ms Agius and Dr Muscat had not given their e-mails to anybody else and did not know how copies had ended up in the hands of the PN media.
The correspondence, covering a period of almost 11 months, was revealed last week. Dr Muscat has already asked the Speaker to investigate the case, saying it representing hacking and spying and posed a threat to democracy.
Ms Agius was suspended by RTK when the e-mails were published.
Questioned about her request, Ms Agius told timesofmalta.com that the important thing at this point was that the investigation was carried out.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Second group of migrants arrives
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
127 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 27th 2011, 00:01
@ Charles J Buttigieg.
It is not "rhetoric, rhetoric, rhetoric". It is facts, facts and still more facts. Those disclosures will remain credible as long as Muscat/Agius do not provide solid evidence to the contrary.
Dr Eddie Fenech Adami agreed to meet and listen to a likely informant with a criminal record who would not confide in the police or anybody else. How on earth do you relate such a necessary meeting with the activity of your imaginary "mole" planted inside an unsuspecting police headquarters! Shame on you!
By your question you also speculate that Dr Eddie Fenech Adami knew the identity of the murderers of Raymond Caruana and Karen Grech because some “mole” operating inside the Police HQ leaked that information to him. Do you realize what you are implying? Let me tell you! You are suggesting that the police knew all along the identity of the murderers even though they did not prosecute anybody, but your imaginary “mole” inside the police HQ identified the murderers to Dr Eddie Fenech Adami!
I have explained, over and over again, that knowing who committed a murder does not mean that the case can be proved beyond reasonable doubt in a Criminal Court - not after the MLP police had been actively engaged in destroying evidence instead of preserving it. That modus operandi by the MLP police is not my opinion – it is the finding of the Criminal Court. You seem to be smugly self complacent about the success to obstruct the course of justice and you perversely keep on bringing it up not realizing its implications for the MLP.
Do not ask me silly questions! Make statements! YOU are alleging that there was some mole "who was informing EFA what was going on at the Police HQ during the Labour Administration". You made that allegation, it is up to YOU to prove it. You mention some mysterious activity "going on at the Police HQ" that was being leaked to Dr Eddie Fenech Adami. What was this mysterious activity apart, of course, from the torture and murder that everyone knows about. Speak out, man - don't defame by insinuation.
Let me give you an example from my own personal experience. Certain notorious and ignoble members of the Security Section of the D.I.K., inside the Other Ranks Mess of the Police GHQ, openly made plans to "burn" me and actually started to put their plan into operation. I immediately made a report about "what was going on at the Police HQ". My report was not made to Dr Eddie Fenech Adami. I reported to the a/Commissioner of Police in person (as if he did not know already what was going on in that section!) The result? The a/Commissioner of Police devised a frame up and when the attempt to have me dismissed failed, the MLP still retired me "compulsorily on grounds of public interest".
I was one of those who, when the police deliberately omitted to act on information that I was reporting to them, I still disclosed that criminal activity – not to Dr Eddie Fenech Adami - but to the Commissioner of Police, in sworn evidence before the P.S.C., and in the Magistrate's Court and, after my compulsory retirement, even in the press. – Does that suggest to you the activity of a “mole” similar to the present case under discussion?
No sir! I do not agree that Dr Eddie Fenech Adami was "conspiring with a subversive mole, planted in an unsuspecting police head quarters". The criminal activity inside the Police GHQ was public knowledge although few knew of the magnitude of the criminal abuse. - Most people in the know were afraid to speak out, and not without reason. It was more than their career and their life was worth. I was not one of them. I paid a very big price.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 27th 2011, 09:39
One day, I might find enough time to write a book to answer to your voluminous rhetoric. Right now I'm too busy looking forward for today and the future.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 27th 2011, 10:16
@ Charles J Buttigieg.
Stage direction:
C.J.B. Exit left, with tail tucked in between legs.
N.B. "Rhetoric" is not a pejorative word. It is a much sought after accomplishment dating from ancient times and still very much appreciated today.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 26th 2011, 14:25
@ M.Borg.
Nobody is disputing what the American Management Association says about internet space at work; but that is not the bone of contention. I accept the norm that my boss goes through all mail addressed to me at the office, I done that when I had subordinates using the Co-mail for suspicious personal material. However, in a situation where employees use their office facilities to send or receive personal mail, their colleagues do not have the right to peruse that material unless they are acting on behalf of the management. And I don’t think that it was RTK’s management that spotted Sabrina’s communications to pass them over to Net News and The Times.
M Borg
Oct 26th 2011, 16:29
Like you I do not know if it was RTK's management who spotted the email.
However any resposible employee would or should make known to management anything which according to him / her goes against the interest of the company.
No one can say, not even you , that this case does not fall in this category.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 26th 2011, 19:21
M .Borg, the Email exchange was not about what was going against the interest of RTK; it’s about ill treatment Sabrina claims she was receiving at RTK. In situations like that there’s absolutely nothing wrong to refer one’s grievances to one’s trade union or one’s local MP or any other person that might be in a position to help. When I was facing a similar predicament at my former place of work I too spoke with high profile politicians when they were in opposition. Any human being in pain would look for some help or a shoulder to cry on. And that is a human instinct not an unethical or illegal act.
The Curia committed one of its most serious blunders when they sacked Dr. Deborah Schembri, the sacking of Sabrina proves that our Church authorities don’t learn through their mistakes.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 27th 2011, 08:32
@ Charles J Buttigieg (26 Oct 2011 at 19:21).
No! Sir!. The exchange of e-mails Muscat/Agius was a discussion of the "mole" activities Sabrina was carrying out in RTK and the possible extension of those activities to The Times and PBS. It also dealt with the way she could be rewarded for her subversive activities by Muscat's support in election campaigns and perhaps a Minsterial post in a future Labour government.
Joseph Scicluna
Oct 27th 2011, 09:43
You got yourself into a corner. Your only way put is thro' the skylight. Have you got a ladder?
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 26th 2011, 14:04
@Charles J Buttigieg (26 Oct 2011 at 10:08)
Joseph Muscat was not “listening in and acting on information supplied by a citizen”. He was himself an active participant, conspiring with a subversive “mole”, planted in an unsuspecting newsroom. He was actively discussing plans how to best utilise that spy to the best advantage of the LP, how to expand that nefarious activity into other news media (The Times and P.B.S.) and how to reward that treasonable behaviour.
Joseph Muscat is not a member of the police force, acting on information received, and investigating suspected crime. He was himself, prima facie, a co-conspirator in dubious and highly questionable activity, unbecoming a prospective prime minister, whose standard of ethics is the legitimate concern of all citizen voters.
No one is asking Joseph Muscat to “vouch for the secrecy of any information”. What is expected from him, and his lady “mole”, is to come clean and rebut – if they can – the credible reports of grievous misconduct by them. They are not doing that. They are avoiding that issue. They put on blinkers, and they try to make everybody else wear blinkers. If they had their way any enquiry should be restricted to a minor side issue, namely how that damning information reached the public domain because the media did their duty and exposed shady proceedings in high places.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 26th 2011, 17:57
Dr. Saliba, rhetoric rhetoric rhetoric, however facts remain unchanged.
EFA,the ex Prime Minister and former President of the Republic was never in the police force and yet he had no qualms to meet and listen to a suspected murderer in a clandestine manner under a bridge during the middle of the night -and while a police investigation was going on. He also declared publicly that he knew who killed Raymond Caruana and Karen Grech- where did he gather that information from? And what about ‘The Malta File’ which was forwarded all over the world, was the information contained in that dossier collected through legitimate and legal means? And who was informing EFA what was going on at the Police HQ during Labour’s Administration? Do you not call that conspiring with a subversive “mole”, planted in an unsuspecting police head quarters?
M Borg
Oct 26th 2011, 12:57
According to the " American Management Association " an internet space at work does not belong to the employee but the space belongs to the employer.
Nearly 52% of employers scan their employee's e-mail . Employers are allowed to do that and are under no legal obligation to tell employees that they are being monitored.
Employees who think that their e-mail conversation are private are wrong the AMA says. This can only be true if they use THEIR own computer and their OWN account,otherwise everything that is on the companies ' computers belongs to them.
Companies can and do scan e-mails, even personal ones that are on their computers, this helps them to block sensitive information from being sent out to third parties.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 26th 2011, 10:55
It would make very interesting reading to know that in other countries all emails and wireless transmissions are being intercepted, hacked and scrutinised in the name of state security. Does this apply to our country or am I only dreaming? Any comments?
Muriel Borg
Oct 26th 2011, 10:19
@ Richard Galea
If you are an employer yourself how are you going to distinguish people like Sabrina from others ? Like she is going to tell you during the interview what she is there for!!!!!!!... if she was there for that reason after all.... ma nizolqux fin-niexef u nahsbu ftit u ma nkunux redikoli and respect this woman's feelings
David Camilleri
Oct 26th 2011, 10:11
We live in the years of Mussolini - pure fascism.
Stephen Mangion
Oct 26th 2011, 09:57
In the UK the smugglers/hackers would get somehting like 25 years for this felony
Muriel Borg
Oct 26th 2011, 09:50
@ Pauline Busuttil
I would do the same thing Sabrina did as that is breaching an individual's privacy as it was her PERSONAL email if you still know what the word personal means and i would go as far as i can to find the culprits to this dirtiness... i think the advice you should give it to the person who published these emails and not to Sabrina as i'm sure she has her own mother to give her advice... so you should comment again and give advice to the person who published the emails now and i'd love to read the advice you are going to give him/her
S. Bonello
Oct 26th 2011, 09:47
Ms. Agius used a gmail account which is freely available. It is not an RTK domain so it makes it personal. Gmail accounts can be accessed from any computer by the user. It would be interesting to see what the police find out. As for scape goats? Aren't we all?
I listened to Ms. Agius regularly and noted the professional way she conducted her programmes.
Wishing you good luck for your future Ms. Agius. You will come out a winner I'm sure !!
M Borg
Oct 26th 2011, 14:08
I am afraid that you are wrong.
She might have used her private Gmail account , but she used her employer's computer to access it . Anything that goes on the internet at work goes through the employer's internet space and as such belongs to the employer.
The employer has every right to read ,even scan all emails that use his " space " . By doing so the employer can block any sensitive infromation from being passed on to third parties.
The sistuation would be different if the employee used his/her computer and his/her own account.to send emails.
Richard Galea
Oct 26th 2011, 08:56
One thing is for sure......I will never employ people like Sabrina.....
Paul Micallef
Oct 26th 2011, 09:59
Who said that she would come and work for you in the first place???
joseph saliba
Oct 26th 2011, 08:52
The voluntary scape-goat.
ADRIAN GRECH
Oct 26th 2011, 08:13
Should RTK take Sabrina to court for treason against the company?
David Camilleri
Oct 26th 2011, 10:11
Is there any evidence about her loyalty to the company? No. Adrian you are mistaken.
Treason? Are we in the times of Henry VIII?
Mario Grima
Oct 26th 2011, 10:21
Wow and if found gulity we shall hang her in St. George's Square in Valletta for divulging the company's top secret plans about their transmission plans from the moon . I think you read a lot of spy stories Mr. Grech or you are just plain nuts.
Pauline Busuttil
Oct 26th 2011, 07:56
Ms Agius mhux ahjar ma titkellem u ma taghmel xejn issa li hareg kollox fil berah!!!! l-ahjar haga hija li toqghod kwieta u tirrifletti x'kont qed taghmel........ Ghadek zghira u jekk trid tista tibdel ghall ahjar. Parir ta' omm dan. Nawguralek.
G Schembri
Oct 26th 2011, 17:49
Dik il-problema bl-ommijiet Maltin sinurja Busuttil. lil uliedhom jghidulhom biex jaghlqu halqhom u jirriflettu, anke jekk ikollhom ragun. Ghalhekk Malta ghandna hafna nies bla sinsla, u l-gvern jibqa jistmana kif qed jistmana.
Mark Cassar
Oct 26th 2011, 06:07
The whole issue of whether a crime was committed must revolve around the content of the emails. If the content centred around a criminal act then the hacker had every right and even the duty as a citizen of Malta to leak the emails for the public and the Authorities to be informed. The issue of an employee working against his employer is a completely different matter. I was always under the impression that it is up to the employer to decide if disciplinary action against the employee is warranted. The employee can then open a case of unfair dismissal.
J. Schembri
Oct 26th 2011, 05:10
Lil Reno calleja: Dur, dur, dur , fl-ahhar xorta tikkonkludi li Sabrina u Joseph inqabdu jikonfoffaw minn wara dahar l-employer taghha.
Minn ha l-kopja tal-emails forsi ghamel xi haga hazina , izda biha kixef xi haga bil-qabda iktar hazina. Kap ta’ partit inqabad fil-fatt iheggeg xi haga li mhix accettata f’demokrazija.
Jien jekk accidentalment insib emails ta’ ikkonfoffar kontra min jimpjegani ghandi d-dmir nikxifhom? Fl-ufficini gieli jidhlu nies fil-komputers ta’ xulxin, iktar u iktar meta l-iskrivanija tkun vojta. Iktar u iktar meta il-kompjuter ikun tal-kumpanija,u l-ufficju jkun ta’ erba’ minn nies.
U hallik mix-scenarios , inqabad u daqshekk .Ghalijja tilifha bl-ispejjez b'kollox . Issa inutli noqghodu nippruva indahhlu lil xi hadd li tkellem ma’ xi gurnalist dwar xi parti ta’ intervista li ma’ tkunx harget tajjeb , dawk jigru dejjem u m’ahniex interessati fihom.
Joseph inqabad jikkonfoffa ma gurnalista fuq li ahjar tibqa' fejn ghandu bzonnha il-partit taghha !
"You invite me to your house and I ask you to use your computer. I forget to log off . If you steal my e-mails and distribute them to anyone else, you are committing a criminal act.” Ma hax pjacir bik certu tali li dahal uninvited u ghamel li ghidt !
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 26th 2011, 10:08
Dr. Saliba, without going into the merit of whether Sabrina was being unethical or acting in an illegal manner towards her employers Joseph Muscat has a right and even in duty bound to listen and act on information given to him by other citizens.
As a former ranking Police Officer you should know that even the law allows the police to listen and act on voluntary information given to them by their informers. Moreover, the police give protection and vouch for the secrecy of such information. True or not?
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 26th 2011, 00:17
"This really smells." (Angus Black 25 Oct 2011 at 20:12)
To be absolutely correct you should write "This really "STINKS" - not "smells".
We, the disgusted Maltese public are those who "really smell" and suffer the nauseating stench of the disloyalty of an employee acting as a spying "mole" undermining the interests ofher employer. The stench is aggravated by the fact that this dishonesty is connived by someone who is a prospective prime minister.
Christian Sciberras
Oct 26th 2011, 00:12
Funny, Reno and some other people are making so many wrong allegations and assumptions.
For instance, there is no law which discusses the use a of an account which has not been logged off.
Also, Reno you should stop calling this mess "illegal" when an employer has every right to non-personal accounts on a computer owned by the said employer.
What I can only say at this point is that Ms Agius has been extremely stupid in saying certain things through the mouth of her employer (in simple terms, communicating sensitive details through her employer's network).
C Falzon
Oct 25th 2011, 23:22
Unbelievable ! - she is caught red handed spying on a news broadcaster for a political party and she has the nerve to request the police to investigate "spying that posed a threat to democracy".
That is not even mentioning the fact that if the person who copied the emails is eventually 'caught' then that person should certainly qualify for protection under the whistelblower act. If that person, knowing what was going on, had not spread the word it would have been a serious lack of civic duty.
Where he/she went wrong in my opinion is in giving that information to a news outlet rather than to the police.
A. Borg
Oct 25th 2011, 23:13
storm in teacup
Reno Calleja
Oct 25th 2011, 22:52
Mr Mifsud. You missed my point completely.
No body has the right to steal my e-mails and leak them to to newspapers.
Even if Ms Agius was using her office computer the person or persons who without her permission looked at her mails and leaked them to the Times was committing a very grave criminal act.
Consider this scenario.
You invite me to your house and I ask you to use your computer. I forget to log off . If you steal my e-mails and distribute them to anyone else, you are committing a criminal act.
As for your contempt for politicicans. I beleive you However I suspect you revile them more if they are Labour politicians.
.I never read any of your coments critsizing any P.N. poltician. Perhaps I missed it. In that case I apologize.
Like in every sphere of life there are two kijnds of people. There are many bad, corrupt politicians who were responsble for the kind of feelings harboured by Mr. Mifsud.
. However I ssure you, my freind , that from both sides of the House, there are good politicians dedicated to their constituents, their party and their convictions. It is the perception that poltics and politicians are dirty and corrupt that keeps off some decent, and honest people from going into politics. Fortunately I know a number of young people who intend to contest the next election who would be an asset for the Party and the country. They are dedicated and hardworking and they are already doing a lot of good in society.
Don't make the same mistake of those who condemned all priests because some of them abused children. There are many good priests.
There are also doctors who are crooks who see only money. However there many doctors who are dedicated to the noble profession.
There are also genuine people like Mr Mifsud seems to be. There are others who are vile who satisfy their troubled souls by being vitriolic and personal.
The case fo Ms Agius has to be viewed in the context of many other scandaolous cases.
How was it possible for someone to hack into the e-mails of all the M.P.s and many other important persons in Maltese Society.? Why is that these days hundreds of people were told to change their passwords because there hospital records have been hacked?
How come that an official letter sent by the Labour Party to Mr Gordon Pisani, who was appointed by the Prime Minsiter as public relations consultant straight from the Nationalist Party Headquarters, on a salary of thousands of euros per month, paid from our taxes, ends up in the hands of a blogger, before he had the decency to answer the letter.
How come that the medical records of Dr. Joseph Muscat, his wife and his children fell in the hands of third parties.
How come that the medical records of a person suing the Labour Departmnent ended up in court to strenghten the hand of the government official.?
How come the telelphones of two M.P.;s the Hon. Evarist Bartolo, a former Minsiter and that of Dr. Pullicino Orlando were tapped during the divorce referendum?
How come that Austin Gatt terrorised a Central Bank employee threatening that he had evidence that this employee passed a story to the press. Who gave Dr.Gatt that evidence? By the way /as usual, Dr. Gatt fell flat on his backside because it turned out that the employee had nothing to do with the story.
I could go on and on.
Mr Joe Micallef
Oct 25th 2011, 23:08
Reno dear! you must have a blooming headache with all the gyrations you're going through.
Can you or your lost leader decide
"No body has the right to steal my e-mails and leak them to to newspapers".
Turn up late Joey has just said that it is perfectly OK to leak emails!
C Scerri
Oct 25th 2011, 23:34
"Why is that these days hundreds of people were told to change their passwords because there hospital records have been hacked?"#
Mixed up thoughts!!! As far as I know, hospital records are not in electronic format but in ink and paper. So how could anyone have been asked to change the passwords as the hospital records had been hacked!!!
"How come that the medical records of Dr. Joseph Muscat, his wife and his children fell in the hands of third parties." - please quote dates and if possible links - as far as I know it was Joseph Muscat himself who divulged these issues.
"How come the telelphones of two M.P.;s the Hon. Evarist Bartolo, a former Minsiter and that of Dr. Pullicino Orlando were tapped during the divorce referendum?" - any proof??
Stop mixing thing up!!!
anthony bartolo
Oct 25th 2011, 23:50
A nd how did you get all this infomation?..........Legal sources naturally.
Anthony Farrugia
Oct 26th 2011, 00:11
Please do not go on and on because you are going round in circles, tying yourself up in knots and contradicting yourself. Perhaps you have not heard Joseph Muscat drawing a very fine jesuitical line between "leaked" and "stolen" emails: if the PL can spin them to its political advantage, they are" leaked" but if the brown stuff hits the fan to the PL's disadvantage, they are "stolen".
Joseph Scicluna
Oct 26th 2011, 04:31
With all your bla bla, Reno, a grave criminal act is when you are a mole. No ifs or buts!
G Schembri
Oct 26th 2011, 06:18
@ Joey Micallef - it is one thing to leak a stolen email and another to leak an email addressed to you. This seems too difficult to understand for someone with a low IQ. Let me try to simplify it for you, it is wrong to access someone else's email account. This is the wrong act and not leaking an email to the press. Like it is not wrong to give someone a present but it would be wrong to give someone a stolen present. Does your IQ understand the difference.
Anthony Farrugia
Oct 26th 2011, 09:50
Reno, even the Titanic went on and on, but finished hitting an iceberg and sinking !
Mr Joe Micallef
Oct 25th 2011, 22:48
Agius wants to cover the whole sky with a palm! And what an awful sky it is for her and Joey!
G Schembri
Oct 26th 2011, 06:21
You seem very fond of the name Joey shall why not sign as Joey Micallef? Dear Joey.
Mr Stephen Borg
Oct 26th 2011, 08:55
Your comment is a little bit out of place and should be addressed to the PN media which illegally obtained personal emails from a personal Gmail account of a private citizen. If they where able to do that with Ms Agius they should be able to do that with yours and with mine. It is of most importance and of public interest that we know how the emails where obtained and ended up in the hands of the PN media..
mark borg
Oct 25th 2011, 22:27
Is Solitu storja -jigru affarijiet pastazalment u fahxijin u il Pn jiprova jimmanipula u jwadab il hmieg tieghu fuq il PL !!! bhal ma gab pajjiz gharkubtejh bid djun u pastazalment isaqsik x'se jghamel il Pl la jitla fil-Gvern !!!
George Grech
Oct 25th 2011, 22:14
so one person accesses a computer with a stolen password and sends his ex boyfriend's compromising photos to his boss and he is welcome in PL with open arms....and others are criminals....u ejja....
Dennis Zammit
Oct 25th 2011, 22:01
Her emails at RTK on RTK's computer are NOT hers but RTKs.
She should have used her personal email server.
Why didn't she complain to GOOGLE who owns and runs Joseph's email server?
lilly vella
Oct 25th 2011, 22:05
ara kieku l 80's kemm kont tnewwah int ehhh minjaf ....
Silvan Cutajar
Oct 25th 2011, 22:30
X`int thawwad?
Noel Mifsud
Oct 25th 2011, 23:20
Int f sensik jew qed tohlom, igifieri jekk tislifni id dar biuex imur weekend break uy nohrog tista tidhol u tiehu li trid. Dawn x affarijeit huma, dawn hsibijiet ta nies in joranti ta veru
Tony Zammit
Oct 26th 2011, 05:50
I regardless how’s computer it is, it’s her personal EMAIL address.
Let me put to you this way.
You have a mail delivery envelope posted to you, But unfortunately the envelope was opened before you got it, would you like it?
David Scicluna
Oct 25th 2011, 22:00
This caes shows that the pn pretend they have a right to control the independent media. As if Joseph Muscat needs someone's permission to communicate with a journalist. By the way who is the new head of news at RTK? Is she a mole as well?
Ramon Casha
Oct 26th 2011, 05:34
Didn't you know that they don't count as moles if they've been transferred over from Net News?
Victor Vella
Oct 25th 2011, 22:00
PUFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF BANG Another baloon gone in Muscat's face lol.So it is not Austin Gatt ir his people that ar ehacking his mail.As for Sabrina, while I understand why you are pissed off at this may I suggest that private mail should be kept in a private email address my dear, that way your private dealings with dear Joseph would have remained private .
Ramon Casha
Oct 26th 2011, 05:34
Do you know what a straw man fallacy is?
PS: A Gmail address IS a private email address.
C Briffa
Oct 25th 2011, 21:52
Try to remeber that Joseph Muscat wasn't the first time that he said in his speeches that he had internal information.
As for Sabrina she must take care to go to the police becasuse leaking confidential informtion is also a crime.
As for Joseph no wonder he is always on the wrong side i.e. Nikki Dimech, Cyrus Engerer he supported people who are facing criminal cases. Wow what a joke he who see coruption in everthing what is done by the government he can't see what is in his own party. poor chap nowadays one can't afford to buy a mirror.
Victor Vella
Oct 25th 2011, 21:46
Imbaghad jghidu li Malta mhux minn Regim Nazzjonalista hija immexxijja. Al giehna dawn jghidu li huma l`Allat tad-demokrazzijja. Sewwa qal Johnny Dalli li f`Malta d-demokkrazzija hija mheddha.
C Scerri
Oct 25th 2011, 23:28
WHy - because someone (most probably a colleague or her employer) downloaded her emails? What has this got to do with democracy!!!
J. Schembri
Oct 25th 2011, 21:31
Dur, dur, dur , fl-ahhar xorta tikkonkludi li Sabrina u Joseph inqabdu jikonfoffaw minn wara dahar l-employer taghha.
Minn ha l-kopja tal-emails forsi ghamel xi haga hazina , izda biha kixef xi haga bil-qabda iktar hazina. Kap ta’ partit inqabad fil-fatt iheggeg xi haga li mhix accettata f’demokrazija.
A Bezzina
Oct 25th 2011, 22:25
Naqbel mija fil-mija!! U fuq hekk ghandu jirrizenja. F'din l-ahhar sena kien pront jghajjat ghar-rizenja ta' Alla biss jaf kemm-il ufficjal. Mela issa ghandu jkun ta' ezempju u jirrizenja hu!
N. Galea
Oct 26th 2011, 10:37
jirizenja Joseph? lool ahjar jirizenja Gonzi!!!!! ghax ghajiena!!!!!! qas inthom nazzjonalisti ukoll! Mela insejtu kemm il dbazwirha ghamel Gonzi fdawn lahhar snin!
Anthony Farrugia
Oct 25th 2011, 21:21
Is Sabrina Agius going to explain her mole activities at RTK on behaf of you know who ?
A Bezzina
Oct 25th 2011, 21:18
Gosh, I was starting to get worried that this news item was going to be forgotten all too quickly!! Thank you Sabrina for ensuring that it is back in the headlines ... We wouldn't want people to forget the hypocrisy, pretense, and deceit that dominated in this exchange of emails!!
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 25th 2011, 21:12
"Edgar,you don't log off the cumputer ,you log in and out. ... ... " (Charles J Buttigieg 25 Oct 2011 at 19:35)
You would better explain that to Microsoft, Wikipedia, Google, Macmillan dictionary, Merriman-Webster dictionary and God knows who else - because they all define and discuss "logging on" and "logging off".
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 26th 2011, 14:54
A user can log in to a system to obtain access and can then log out or log off when the access is no longer needed. To log out is to close off one's access to a computer system after having previously logged in. Think a bit and you’ll realise that there’s a difference.
Matthew Agius
Oct 25th 2011, 21:05
Joseph Muscat is going all hysterical........who would go through the hassle of hacking to get a cheezy chat between an immature "prospective" PM and a wannabe Minister - Journalist? I'm sure if it were hacking there would be much more compromising information to reveal...
Missu jaqbad jammetti li inqabad jghaffeg.
Anthony Grech
Oct 25th 2011, 21:05
Min jisraq irid irodd.
Charles Cachia
Oct 25th 2011, 21:01
anyone who divulges personal and/or sensitive material in unencrypted email is an idiot or has ulterior motives sorry.
Alfred Grech
Oct 25th 2011, 20:57
In my not so humble opinion, anyone who intrudes in the privacy of others is simply low and rude. If it was a case of national security or of a crime being complentated then yes, good to disclose it, otherwise it's not acceptable in a civilized society. To view personal correspondence is very wrong - to distribute it to others is vile.
Mary Ann Borg
Oct 25th 2011, 23:25
@Mr A Grech: I trust you also apply the verbs 'low', 'rude' 'wrong' and 'vile' to whoever gets paid for a job and instead provides inside information on her employer to a leader of a political party. Or is this 'honourable' in your eyes?
Mary Ann Borg
Oct 25th 2011, 20:51
Uh Miskina. L-ewwel toqghod tindihes ma Joseph u tghaddi informazzjoni kunfidenzjali fuq il-kumpannija li thaddimha u ttiha l-paga umbghad tmur tnewwagh ghand il-Pulizija ghax inqabdet. Kienet diga' qed tara lila nfissha ministru fil-kabinett ta' Joseph din tafux. Forsi kienet se tkun xi wahda mis Super Candidates li qed jimbotta il-leader tal Labour. Tarax kemm kienet herqana fix xoghol professjonali taghha ta' head of news ta' kumpannija privata. Tghid jitnizzel dan l-episodju fis CV gdida?
Anthony Mifsud Bonnici Giordani
Oct 26th 2011, 06:21
"tghaddi informazzjoni kunfidenzjali" ISSOSTANZJA dak li qeda tghid Ms. Borg ghax kieku jiena Ms. Agius zgur infittxek ghal malafama.
Jurgen Farrugia
Oct 25th 2011, 20:50
Really yes deviate the issue from the contents of that e-mail to hacking.Shame on you manipulating a divorce campaign for your favour,because Dr.Joseph Muscat and the PL have promised it was not a political matter.We can see that Dr.Muscat.The future prime minister of this country trying to implant moles in the times and pbs and acquiring information about the Divorce campaign.And for the coherency of hacking,please Mr.Joseph Muscat explain why I receive Birthday Cards and Letters FROM YOU AND PL,SINCE I REGISTERED ON DOI MAIL.Even tough I have never been a member of PL,you managed to get my e-mail adress,home adress and my mobile number.Would you dare to give your reasonable explanation for this please Dr.Joseph Muscat?
FRANS H SAID
Oct 25th 2011, 20:34
Some of the bloggers raised interesting points. Thus. The police should investiage EVERYTHING, that is if they are genuinly allowed to do so.
C Scerri
Oct 25th 2011, 23:25
You, me and the rest are not bloggers - we are just posting comments - use the right terms!!!
Angus Black
Oct 25th 2011, 20:12
This really smells.
Can Sabrina tell us whether Joseph encouraged her to approach the Police? Just like she was encouraged to stay at RTK 'because he needed here there'? And afterwards, to apply at the Times and at PBS?
And if the affirmative, is she naive enough not to realize that Joseph is using her ?
If Sabrina has referred the case to the Police of her own volition and not pushed by Joseph, then she must have more guts than Joseph who referred the case to the Speaker rather than the Commissioner.
While the person who lifted the e-mails may have broken the privacy law and could face charges, the fact remains that the contents of the e-mails will never absolve Joseph of the unethical use of journalists and use them to form part of the Labour propaganda machine, forcing them to reveal confidential information of the station/paper and to slant their news in favour of the LP.
Anthony Busuttil
Oct 25th 2011, 20:09
What ever that sabrina was using an RTK computer during RTK time you cannot uplift her personal mail that is illegal and in breach of data protection. RTK should have started investigation themselves how Sabrina used their property and time for her personal use. That is another thing.
S. Briffa
Oct 25th 2011, 20:07
Sorry no disrespect, while she has every right to call for an investigation as these where private emails, but whatever the case what was going on it came out!!!
As for a threat of democracy, come on ...hacking maybe ...SPYING who was actually spying in this case!! In democracy we should be open not go behind peoples backs!!!!
Antoine Vella
Oct 25th 2011, 20:01
Mintroffjani do not know when to stop digging themselves into deeper and deeper holes.
The PN has had a field day with this incident and thanks to Sabrina Agius herself, the case will drag on and on.
raymond scicluna
Oct 25th 2011, 19:55
I am really amused how people rather than hiding themselves from their foul play, play the victim s role. Try to alienate people cause playing the victim s role may trick certain people but not me!! I was always taught that When you are in shit, don t speak but with certain people, the same does not apply. Anyway lets hope the Curia and the court will hit hard on Ms Agius for her incredible and incredulous disloyalty versus her employee and that coming the next election, the electorate will pay back the equivalent to Joseph s foul play.A red card will be suffice
Carmel camilleri
Oct 25th 2011, 20:13
Quite true Rajmond. She just do not know what is the meaning of the word shame. Typical labour. She goes on the attack to hind her guilt.
R. Gauci
Oct 25th 2011, 20:17
Paul Borg Olivier ha li haqqu Sur Scicluna? Dak li talab b'email li d-dettalji tieghi u tieghek jintbghatu Tal-Pieta' jekk immorru go xi Ministeru biex ninqdew.
Il-PN ma jaghmilx planting? Jekk tichad allura qed tghix fuq Mars ghax kull fejn tmur ta` certu mportanza mmexxi minn Nazzjonalisti, media, ministeri, Knisja, parastatali etc.
David Farrugia
Oct 25th 2011, 21:07
It will not be a red card. It will be a red vote. I am eager to see the who were the people who copied these emails and handed them over to PN. I am eager to learn of the collusion between RTK and the PN.
It has already clear that Sabrina was a victim of abuse by her employers.
G Schembri
Oct 25th 2011, 21:26
Are you serious? How would you feel if someone one way or another got hold of your personal mail and published it? No one has the right to read private mail, except maybe the police when investigating a crime. I cannot see why the Curia or moreover the court should hit her hard, just because she sent Joseph Muscat some e mails. She has already been sacked by RTK, very conviniently the e mails where made public just when Ms Aguis decided to take her employers to court because she felt cheated out of a promotion.Are you insinuating that anyone who communicates with the Leader of the opposition should be punished by the courts? I must say you are a very democratic person (you think).
David Scicluna
Oct 25th 2011, 21:52
Why do you have to show so much hate? Shame on you!
Peter Shaw
Oct 25th 2011, 19:55
Humans are always the weakest link where IT security is concerned.
Edward Gatt
Oct 25th 2011, 19:42
If Sabrina was careless and left her computer logged in and someone just sat on 'her desk' and used 'her computer' (atcually they are her employers' not hers) and copied these emails. would one call theft?
If yes, what would one call if someone publishes an email which one recevies and which is evidently not meant for him? Remeber the email recevied by Jason Micallef which was meant for Jason Azzopardi? Was this not unethical at the least as well?
But Paul Borg Olivier did not ask the police to investigate.
It was a mistake on his part and that was it.
D Farrugia
Oct 25th 2011, 19:53
YOU ARE WRONG EDWARD.
They accessed her PERSONAL PRIVATE email without her consent.
It is illegal even if using your employers' PC.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 25th 2011, 20:02
Edgar ,ma nafx minn fejn issibhom l-argumenti tieghek. When we receive an email validly addressed to us we become legal recipients and no law obliges us to check whether it was sent to us inadvertently. PBO made a gaffe and the law offers no protection for that kind of stupidity.
J Busuttil
Oct 25th 2011, 20:09
@D.Farrugia,
At least some one know something about how the e-mails came to be published. I am sure that you will be available to help the police in solving this issue.
Charles Vella
Oct 25th 2011, 20:12
Mr Farrugia... I work in an office... I have full internet access and naturally e-mails... eventhough I have nothing to hide, I NEVER EVER browse or check my personal e-mails from my work PC! ...if I left cookies behind they are there to be accessed by any one... full stop!
Keep your private life at HOME, and don't take it to work! Work is Work... FULLSTOP!
Mr Edward Caruana Galizia
Oct 25th 2011, 20:14
They did not access it by hacking it. It was left open, and all the secrets were there for anyone to see.
Mark Mangion
Oct 25th 2011, 20:37
Maybe thats true but nothing excuses her disloyalty towards her employers - thats tantamount to industrial espionage in my books which is punishable by law. Now she's just playing the victim in a bid to save face.
Ramon Casha
Oct 25th 2011, 20:53
It's not called theft, but it's still a crime - one serious enough to merit 4 years imprisonment.
On the other hand if you mistakenly send an email to Jason A instead of Jason B, you can blame nobody but yourself. PBO did not ask the police to investigate because nobody broke any law.
Edward Gatt
Oct 25th 2011, 21:21
Is it still illegal if the meail was open on 'her' computer for everyone to see if he just sat down at 'her' desk?
And you have not answered my question.
Is it legal/ethical to publish an email which one recevies when it is evident that it was recevied in error?
G Schembri
Oct 25th 2011, 21:33
The email Jason Micallef published was addressed to him, he accessed no private account, when someone receives an email, it becomes his property and he can do what he sees fit with it. On the contrary the emails published in this case, where not forwarded to the media by the sender or the receiver of the emails. Employers have no right over their employees private life and mail.
Wilfred Camilleri
Oct 25th 2011, 21:35
@D Farrugia
You are wrong! Employers do not normally allow people to use equipment and facilities provided by the employer for private business! Doing so can be grounds for dismissal. If she used her employers' computer then her employer has the right to take disciplinary action. Anything that a person stores on an employer's computer is not private as far as the employer is concerned.
David Scicluna
Oct 25th 2011, 21:56
Yes. it is called theft. You are not allowed to take something which is not your, even if it is lying around. The borg olivier e mail was actually sent, so the case is tottally different. It is amazing how you, nationalist apologist try to justify anything!
Wilfred Camilleri
Oct 25th 2011, 22:39
@David Scicluna An employer has the right to access, read, and dispose off anything that is on a computer belonging to the employer! It is only theft if someone else not authorized by the employer copied the messages.
Ramon Casha
Oct 26th 2011, 05:33
@Wilfred Camilleri: Gmail does not store any email on the computer you're using. The employer has no right to gain access to her email simply because she uses the office equipment to log in to it. IF the employer has a policy that no non-business websites may be accessed, then (a) they should block such websites, and (b) they have the right to terminate that person's employment, but they would STILL not have the right to access her email. If you are in any doubt, please check what the criminal code (subtitle V) says, not what you think.
@Edward Gatt: Yes, it's still a crime to print out and/or copy. However, keep in mind that there was more than one stolen email so it's not simply a matter of finding a message open (very very unlikely to begin with) and then printing it out.
pat muscat
Oct 25th 2011, 19:33
What a coincidence, the e mails covered a period of over a year and were published now!. Is the RTK boss conducting an inquiry how an employee's private e mails were stolen; is it a coincidence that whilst Sabrina had an ongoing problem with RTK ( the new head of news comes fresh from the PN news stables) the stolen or hacked e mails were published now? 'Serhan il-mohh' alright, just as Paul Borg Olivier directed private data from ordinary citizens to be directed from Government Departments onto the PN headquarters, who is going to believe that this is not a systematic' big government' catch you all? Anqas bicca e mail ma tista tafda; kemm gejna sew!
Wilfred Camilleri
Oct 25th 2011, 21:41
If she used her employer's computer, then the employer has the right to look at the emails and to take any action necessary resulting from viewing such emails. This cannot be considered as theft. Whatever is stored on the employer's computer belongs to the employer not the employee. If any employee is foolish enough to use an employer's computer for his/her private business, then they diverse what they get!
Richard Caruana
Oct 25th 2011, 19:32
So it wasn't hacking after all?
At least she has a bit more sense than JM.
joseph mifsud
Oct 25th 2011, 19:26
prosit sabrina.min jinqabad ghandu jiehu dak li haqqu.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 25th 2011, 20:02
@ Joseph Mifsud.
... u kemm int kif ukoll Joseph Muscat inqbadtu. U kif!
J.C. Borg
Oct 25th 2011, 20:33
Bhalma nqabad Joseph Muscat u tilef il-kredtu ma'kulhadd.
Mr Stephen Caruana
Oct 25th 2011, 19:26
Don't worry - get some 2-3 police cyber crimes officers to waste some of their valuable time to research such a useless piece of information.
The police Force should be using their precious time on more important matters other then politicians and their puppets irrespective of the colour.
FRANS H SAID
Oct 25th 2011, 20:32
Very funny if it was no serious!
FRANS H SAID
Oct 25th 2011, 19:18
I also hope that the police will investigate ALL the hacking that is taking place, especially on people that criticise or who might have had a clash with any one of the almighty all powerfull that control Malta from behind the scenes.
Obviously, the police will not be able to do so. Malta is SUPPOSED to be a democracy, which like Mrs Bucket is spelt T H E O C R A C Y.
Ramon Casha
Oct 25th 2011, 20:48
With a few exceptions the police will not initiate an investigation unless someone first files a report.
C Scerri
Oct 25th 2011, 23:24
This was not a case of hacking - stop using this phrase - the pdf's are clear - these were printed off the gmail account - so if anything it is someone getting hold of her computer and printing the emails - simple.
JOSEPH VELLA
Oct 25th 2011, 19:12
And what about the information she was leaking to JM about RTK?
Silvan Cutajar
Oct 25th 2011, 20:07
hacked accounts means compromised information. For all we know it was tampered with.
David Scicluna
Oct 25th 2011, 21:57
Like what?
Reno Calleja
Oct 25th 2011, 19:07
Let us hope who ever stole the information from Ms Agius will be cuaght and punished.
Even though journalists have a code of etichs not to reveal their sources, in the Rupert Murdock case, journalsts were forced by a Parlaiemntary committee and an independent enquiry to reveal their sources.
This is a very serious case because it concerns theft of personal information which is a crime under the criminal law.
When the Times sacked a journalist recently following an incident where a student confronted Minister Austin Gatt, Dun Anton Gouder and Peppi Azzopardi lambasted the Times on the RTK programme Naqbel jew ma Naqbilx. In the case of Ms. Agius who was unceremoniously sacked for fighting for her rights, Father Gouder and Peppi kept mum.
Edgar Gatt
Oct 25th 2011, 19:19
I am sure Sabrina Agius will be more careful in the future to log off when she shall be using her new employers computer, more so if she shall be giving confidential information belonging to her employer.
George Mifsud
Oct 25th 2011, 19:26
Mr.Calleja - you conveniently left out the fact that Ms.Agius was on RTK's property, getting paid by RTK to supposedly do a job and that ultimately the computer was and is the property of RTK. Are these the lessons we want to send to the younger generations. Make sure you get a job and a good one, but once you're in just rip off your employer and who cares what trouble your employer lands in.
Ms.Agius's naivete steered her to be used by politician/s and I am sorry for her. As for the politician/s - I only have contempt.
Charles J. Buttigieg
Oct 25th 2011, 19:35
Edgar,you don't log off the cumputer ,you log in and out. Who told you that Sabrina was using her office computer and how do you know that the mail was leacked from her PC and not by hacking Dr.Muscat's?
Bernard Mamo
Oct 25th 2011, 20:05
@Mr. George Mifsud.
How do you know those emails were sent from her workplace? Yes they DO talk about work but i can see nothing from the addresses that show they were sent from work.
All I can see is sabrina.agius80@gmail.com and joseph@josephmucat.com. RTK should not have access to her gmail account in no way whatsoever. If it were an email address @RTK.org.mt yes they have a right to see the contents (if the mailbox is hosted and owned by RTK, or paid for by RTK, or specified in the contract (in case of remote mail forwarding). If someone used her unlocked computer to view her gmail account, that is spying and theft of information. It's the same as if i left my bathroom door unlocked (unlocked pc) and someone came in while i wasn't watching (log on, remove screensaver, whatever) and took pictures of me naked (printed the private emails), then leaked them (sent the emails to the media). Is that right?
I think i know what i'm saying more or less. This is part of my job. Unfortunately in Malta where technology is involved we are in a place where nobody knows a jack, and everyone tries to look smarter than thou by exploiting people's ignorance. Another case which comes to mind is the case of recording court hearings on magnetic media. Hello? Hard drives ARE magnetic media!
here is the link for the pdf of the released emails for your reference:
http://c256.r56.cf3.rackcdn.com/656f26da0c93832bb80c6237f2b096ae2018409285.pdf
Edgar Gatt
Oct 25th 2011, 20:51
Charles trust you to pick on a small detail about logging out and avoiding the real issue. She was ''stealing'' confidential information about her employer. Now whether it was the employers computer or her own, is not important. Not being loyal to your employer is very unethical, to say the least.
Angus Black
Oct 25th 2011, 21:45
@ Charles J Buttigieg
If you have a computer and decide to restrict access by using a password, then you 'log off your computer' and no one except the password owner can access it.
Employees are given a password and are expected to 'Log off' even if they need a few minutes to go to the washroom. If Sabina did not, then she took a risk and is paying for it.
Justifying the acquisition of the leaked information, is another matter altogether. From what was reported it seems more likely that the info was obtained from Sabrina's computer than from Joseph's. Simple logic tells me that hacking is not so simple due to firewalls etc. and it takes an expert to do it. However we will have to wait for the Speaker's investigation (limited tools renders it almost irrelevant) and the Police investigation requested by Sabrina but, mysteriously, not by Joseph.
The contents of the e-mails however are totally crass and unjustifiable. especially if originating from Sabrina and the leader of the Labour Party and leader of the Opposition. This was not a one time flirt, but it kept going on for nearly a year!
Alfred Grech
Oct 26th 2011, 02:33
George, even if she was using her employer's computer, then she should be penalized by the employer for stealing time from hime but to send personal emails to the media is a vile act - i would not trust the person who did it.
john muscat
Oct 25th 2011, 19:04
Wishing Ms.Agius good luck, hoping to see who was the culprit as this is a serious crime, spying in anybody's e-mails, being Ms.agius's or anybody's else for that matter.
Larson Pisani
Oct 25th 2011, 19:00
Xi haga tal-misthija u vera tal-misthija meta int tqassam emails personali ta persuna.... din hija il liberta li qed nghixu fiha!
Aaron Vella
Oct 25th 2011, 20:11
Insejt li Joseph Muscat laqa' lil Cyrus Engerer b'idu miftuha. Dik hija il-liberta li se jkollna meta jitla il-labour?
Carmel camilleri
Oct 25th 2011, 20:19
Hekk ghamel il Labour b' emails li akkwista waqt il-kampanja tar-referendum tad-divorzju.. Dak in-nhar ma ftahtx halqek Larson.
M Cassar
Oct 25th 2011, 20:24
Meta l-PL ghamel uzu min emails kunfidenzjali hekk ghidt ukoll?