A lawyer yesterday accused a police inspector of “actively contributing to the wrongful conviction” of a man for sexually abusing his daughter by missing pivotal evidence in the case.

The man’s defence lawyer, Tonio Azzopardi, made the allegation as he cross-examined Police Inspector Louise Calleja about how she had conducted the investigation into allegations that Emanuel Camilleri had abused his young daughter.

She didn’t miss a mouse, she missed an elephant

After he was charged, the girl and her brother filed some 25 reports of child neglect against their mother, who was last week charged with perjury and making false allegations of abuse. The brother, who has since died of cancer, was left to sleep in the street, Dr Azzopardi said.

These reports were missed. “I’m not saying she missed a mouse, she missed an elephant,” Dr Azzopardi charged, arguing that the inspector had actively contributed to Mr Camilleri’s wrongful conviction and imprisonment.

The inspector was questioned on the witness stand in a constitutional case in which Mr Camilleri is arguing that his right to a fair hearing was breached.

The constitutional case was filed last July shortly after Mr Camilleri’s conviction and two-year-jail term had been confirmed on appeal.

Inspector Calleja denied Dr Azzopardi’s claims, saying she had presented all the evidence possible both for and against Mr Camilleri, as was her duty.

Asked specifically if she knew about the child neglect reports, the inspector said she had not been informed about them and had not come across them in the police data base.

She was stationed within the Criminal Investigation Department and such reports were not handled by her section. It investigated sexual abuse cases usually referred by Appoġġ.

The inspector said she took the decision to prosecute Mr Camilleri after she had heard the girl’s version and found her to be consistent. She consulted Appoġġ and the Attorney General before moving ahead on charges of corruption of minors.

The visit to the police headquarters was logged and the girl made no such apology

Dr Azzopardi asked her how she could say she felt the girl was consistent when she had asked for a psychological report to be drawn up because of conflicting issues.

Inspector Calleja replied that when children of a certain age – eight at the time – tried to explain sexual abuse, more details were needed for the purposes of clarification.

She did not file charges of rape, although the girl did claim it, because there was no medical evidence of rape.

Dr Azzopardi said the girl spoke out against her mother to friends at school and a report issued by Appoġġ was littered with these details.

The inspector said she had known about the problems the girl had with her parents and she had spoken to her about them.

The lawyer asked her if she had been told that in March 2010, the girl, then aged 16, had gone to police headquarters with her father to apologise to the police about lying about the sexual abuse.

The visit was logged and the girl made no such apology, the officer replied.

Asked why the Children’s Advocate, Stephanie Galea, had not testified after the girl told her she had lied about the abuse allegations, Inspector Calleja said it was Magistrate Miriam Hayman who had stopped her from testifying.

The case continues on June 16.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.