The 29-year-old charged with being an accomplice in a violent Birkirkara hold-up in 2009 gave the police at least three conflicting versions of how he drove off in the getaway car, a jury heard today.

The trial’s first witness - Police Inspector Keith Arnaud – took the stand today in a detail-packed eight-hour hearing presided over by Mr Justice Antonio Mizzi.

Matthew Mizzi of Cospicua stands charged with being an accomplice in the attempted murder carried out by Jonathan Coleiro, being in possession of a firearm, driving the car allegedly used in the armed robbery without a licence and filing a false police report.

The incident happened on April 13, 2009, when Mr Mizzi drove Mr Coleiro to a shop called Seven Mobiles in Psaila Street, Birkirkara, with the intent to carry out a robbery.

Shop owner Charles Zammit was held at gunpoint and forced into a room at the back of the shop while Mr Coleiro made off with three mobile phones and a laptop. The owner gave chase, in the process being shot at multiple times and being pierced by a bullet once in his left hand. The bullet exited his hand and lodged itself in his side.

Insp. Arnaud said the victim had told the police the aggressor escaped in a green Hyundai Accent, which had its engine and brake lights on as Mr Coleiro sprinted towards it.

The vehicle, which was described as seeming "geared to go", was driven by a person other than Mr Coleiro.

Following the hold-up, Mr Mizzi approached the Msida Police Station and reported that while he was in Birkirkara waiting for his girlfriend, he heard the sound of gunshots and was promptly held at gunpoint by a masked man who ordered him to drive off.

"We first thought a second hold-up had been carried out," Insp. Arnaud said.

"I sent two police officers to the spot. But something in Matthew's version just didn't add up."

Insp. Arnaud recalled how the accused had claimed he had a girlfriend he called "Michelle", whom he had met two weeks earlier. He said he had gone out with her on a date twice and dropped her off in Birkirkara, close to the crime scene.

Mr Mizzi insisted he did not know her mobile number or anything else about her except for her first name. He said that, on the day, he had been casually hanging about the area to see whether he would run into her.

“I found it hard to believe that, in 2009, he didn’t have her mobile number. I kept asking him to give us more details about her – we didn’t want to keep him under arrest if he was innocent.”

Insp. Arnaud also reflected that a normal person threatened with a firearm would not simply drive off immediately but was bound to hesitate under shock. Yet the victim reported that the car engine was ignited and the brake lights were lit, as if it were ready to speed off. 

Mr Mizzi then changed his version of events, stating that he had given a friend a lift to Birkirkara where he was then was forced to drive off by a masked person.

He admitted that he knew who the aggressor was but was terrified of revealing his name. He said that when the aggressor removed the balaclava in the car, Mr Mizzi realised it was his friend. He was very angry and kicked him out of the car.

But why would he profess himself terrified of the aggressor but then pluck up the courage to eject him from the car, the inspector questioned.

“I asked Matthew: ‘Why didn’t you file a correct police report in the first place?  If you are innocent, tell us who he is and the law will protect you.”

Mr Mizzi changed his version yet again, eventually stating that he had taken Jonathan Coleiro to carry out an errand in Birkirkara. He was told to drop him off at Wignacourt Street but knew neither the nature nor the location of the errand. He said Mr Coleiro only told him he was “going shopping” and carried a bag in his hand, the contents of which Mr Mizzi claimed he did not know.

While he was waiting in the car, a masked man forced him to drive off at gunpoint. He later removed the beanie from his face, revealing himself to be Mr Coleiro.

Mr Mizzi told the police he uttered something to the effect of: “Illaħwa x’għamiltli” (“Goodness, what did you do to me”) and dropped him off when he was asked to.

Led by prosecuting lawyers Elaine Mercieca and Ann Marie Cutajar from the Attorney General’s office, Insp. Arnaud told the jury that Mr Coleiro had claimed that he owed Mr Mizzi €200 and that it was Mr Mizzi who supplied him with the old, snubnosed revolver.

 Mr Coleiro also claimed he was threatened by Mr Mizzi with the same revolver he was then given.

Leading the cross-examination, defence lawyer Michael Sciriha latched upon this point.

“Insp. Arnaud, does your memory work in reverse, or in fast forward? Would you remember something you heard yesterday or something you heard a year ago?” Dr Sciriha questioned.

“Then tell me: why did an experienced police officer like yourself never testify about this before? This threat with the revolver was never mentioned in 25 pages of your testimony’s transcript.”

Insp. Arnaud replied that it was normal for someone to forget something small. Dr Sciriha strongly objected to such a detail being labelled “small”.

Insp. Arnaud said that his memory was jogged when the balaclava/beanie was exhibited to the jurors. The eye apertures were cut out in a slovenly manner and he remembered Mr Coleiro telling him that it was because he had hastily ripped them out whilst in the car.

The case continues.