The price of a precious life

Some months ago, a man was fined €20,000 and jailed for nine months for dumping his pet dog in a skip, where it died. The dog was sick and its owner does not come from the sort of background where dogs are taken to vets.

The glaring lack of consistency in the treatment of certain defendants and protracted legal proceedings have marred the image of Lady Justice- Claire Bonello

Still, he paid a high price for his lack of sensitivity. He spent a month in jail before being released on bail on a personal guarantee of €3,000. Then he was landed with a stratospheric fine and jail time.

Presumably this excessive punishment was meant to be a deterrent to other people who were thinking of being cruel to animals. Although I don’t condone cruelty to animals, I am still shocked at the draconian nature of the sentence – one which totally disregardsthe man’s background and lifecircumstances.

But if that sentence was shocking, the one given last week was appalling. I’m talking about thesentence of the Criminal Court presided over by Magistrate Miriam Hayman where contractor Carmel Micallef and subcontractorRaymond Calleja were fined a paltry €4,000 each for causing the death of an 84-year-old Rita Vella. The contractors walked out of court as free men, probably after flipping open their cheque book to pay off their peanut fine.

Vella’s relatives were left gasping at it all. For 12 years after their mother’s death, they had traipsed up and down to court as the evidence was strung out from one sitting to the next. After all the heartbreak, the inconvenience and lengthy proceedings, the findings are contained in a super-slim11-page judgment.

Both Micallef and Calleja admitted that – yes – they were fully aware that when carrying out excavation works in a property they should have observed the mandatory buffer distance of one metre from the adjoining property. This didn’t stop them from digging out an almighty crater in the property adjacent to Vella’s, completely disregarding the buffer zone rule.

Calleja stated he had never seen the architect’s plan for the property. He continued digging away and removing the earth which was shoring up Vella’s property even though he was fully aware this was in breach of all building and safety regulations.

When their architect arrived on site, he was shocked to see the depth of the excavations and the fact that they had extended right to the wall of Vella’s property. The architect advised the contractors that the wall should be reinforced at once.

Before that could happen, fissures snaked up the walls and the stairs in Vella’s property moved away from the walls. The plaster in the walls started cracking, fine dust started falling from the ceiling and an ominous cracking noise could be heard.

Then, when the Vella family were gathered around the dining room table for lunch, the walls of the house gave way and crashed down upon Vella. Although injured, her son made it out of there.

She was not so lucky. The weight of two storeys falling upon her frail body caused serious head injuries and crushed ribs and vertebrae.

Vella died later that afternoon. Her son, who lived with her, losthis mother, his home and his possessions in one fell swoop. He had to borrow a pair of shoes to attend her funeral.

The contractors were accused and found guilty of involuntary homicide. The maximum punishment for that is a term of imprisonment of up to four years and a fine of €11,646.87. The punishment is increased if the offender causes bodily harm to another victim (as was the case here).

Although all these elements subsisted, and the court found there had been gross negligence, both Micallef and Calleja got off with less than half the maximum fine and with no jail time.

So we fill our prisons with dog killers but not with those who cause the death of a woman. In criminal proceedings, the fine involved is paid to the state, not to Vella’s heirs. They must conduct separate civil proceedings to claim compensation. Since she was an elderly woman, she will not be considered as having had productive years left and the compensation payable decreases significantly.

The court had an excellent opportunity to award a sentence which would serve as a deterrent to those who work in the building industry with cavalier disregard for the safety and health of third parties.

A stiff sentence would have been called for in the circumstances, where the accused carried out working blatantly disregarding all relevant rules. Instead we get this ridiculous sentence where gross negligence only costs a few thousand euros.

A lack of familiarity with the way the court system operates may contribute to suspicions and mistaken conclusions about certain sentences, but this time I don’t blame the public if it’s faith in the systemis shaken.

The glaring lack of consistency in the treatment of certain defendants, protracted legal proceedings and overtly lenient sentences like this one, have marred the image of Lady Justice.

Vella was killed because of the gross negligence of those who couldn’t care less.

This sentence is the equivalent of a great big gob of spit being hawked on her grave by the justice system.

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt