The court has dismissed lawyer Lynn Zahra's challenge to the Police Commissioner to take action against an officer who she claimed leaked information to columnist Daphne Caruana Galizia on the basis of exclusive circumstantial evidence.

Dr Zahra claimed that Police Inspector Jason Sultana recorded a conversation that took place during a meeting and then passed it on to the columnist.

She referred to a post on Ms Caruana Galizia’s blog on June 16, 2013, when it was reported that someone had recorded Dr Zahra discussing the possibility of filing criminal libel proceedings against her (the columnist). The meeting had taken place at the Sliema police station.

Dr Zahra had said that only Mr Sultana and Police Superintendent Ray D’Anastas were present for the meeting. She claimed that Mr Sultana put his mobile phone on the desk and recorded her.

But in a detailed, 22-page judgement, Magistrate Aaron Bugeja threw out the lawyer's case, ruling that there was insufficient prima facie evidence to uphold her complaint.

He noted that while it was possible to prove a fact through circumstantial evidence, this needed to be examined with great "attention and circumspection" which ensures that the evidence forms an unequivocal link between the fact and the person.

None of the witnesses could confirm whether there was anyone else eavesdropping into the conversation.

The court pondered on why Insp. Sultana would place the phone so prominently before her if he was attempting to record her clandestinely. And if Insp. Sultana had truly recorded her, why would he be the one to pass the information to Ms Caruana Galizia? 

"The court cannot supplement proof with conjectures and assumptions," the court said, dismissing the lawyer's challenge.