The law will be on Claire Zammit Xuereb’s side if it results that she stabbed Nicholas Gera to defend her husband, Duncan Zammit, at their Sliema penthouse.

It is a case of lawful defence if an aggressor is killed at night-time at an inhabited house

Article 224 of the Criminal Code specifies that if a homicide, or bodily harm, occurs at night and involves the victims breaking into the property, then no offence would have been committed.

According to the Criminal Code, it is a case of lawful defence if an aggressor is killed, or injured, at night-time – between the hours of sunset and sunrise – if the homicide, or harm, is the result of preventing the aggressor from entering an inhabited house, apartment or a connected annex, either by scaling walls or breaking enclosures and doors into it.

If it were established that Mr Gera broke into the penthouse in High Street, Sliema, in the early hours of New Year’s Day, Mrs Zammit Xuereb could plead self-defence, that is, if it resulted that she had hit him with a knife, legal experts said. At 6.15 a.m., it would still be pitch-dark, therefore, within the boundaries of the law. Investigators believe Mrs Zammit Xuereb, the daughter of entrepreneur Angelo Xuereb, somehow intervened to defend her husband, who was being attacked by Mr Gera.

The police had the option not to prosecute the inhabitants of the house. Usually, their decision would be taken after consultation with the Attorney General’s office.

However, the scenario changes if Mr Gera was invited to enter or had knocked on the door and was let in.

“In that case, one would have to investigate how the incident started, or was provoked, how it escalated, who was the first assailant and whether, in repelling the first assault, the person defending himself exceeded the limits of self-defence. Then, it becomes like an ordinary fight in the street in daytime,” a legal expert said.

If, as the police suspect, Mr Gera scaled the walls of the roof of Falcon House, the scene of the crime, jumped into the terrace of Mr Zammit’s penthouse a floor below and slipped in through the gym, it would be a case of “full” self-defence, in accordance with article 224 (a).

Even if a window on to the terrace were left open, it would still “not nullify” the climbing down from the roof onto the terrace, which would lead to justifiable homicide or bodily harm.

However, the reason why the window would have been left open could give rise to further questions and change the scenario again. If it transpires that one of the occupants of the house did not close it on purpose for Mr Gera to enter, then it would no longer be a question of self-defence, the expert noted.

The use of excessive self-defence does not come into the picture if Mr Gera obtained access to the apartment against the wishes of the occupants. It comes into play only if he entered the premises on their invitation or with their consent.