Cases involving the sexual abuse of minors are always troubling. Aside from the physical and irreparable mental damage suffered by the victim, there is the ordeal endured by his or her family. This can bring with it a lot of internal guilt as well as attracting a certain amount of undeserved stigma.
Once an allegation of sexual abuse has been made, a number of factors should be borne in mind: that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty; that a minor can never - however willing they may have appeared to be - consent to a sexual act with an adult; and that the allegation is treated with the seriousness it merits by all the concerned authorities.
These issues are difficult enough to deal with in a small place like Malta, where there is often little more than one degree of separation between one person and another. The situation is compounded in Gozo, where - despite all the progress the tiny island has made in recent years - silence is still a golden rule and where a lot of familiarity can breed a lot of contempt.
Last week, The Sunday Times carried a story saying that certain individuals tried to persuade the family of a 14-year-old girl - at the centre of sexual assault allegations - not to proceed with testimony against four men from Nadur. We did so not to interfere in the case itself, but to flag concern over a situation that in any society, however small, is intolerable.
Thankfully, it appears that the family resisted such attempts and pressed ahead with the case, believing, no doubt, that the interests of their daughter are paramount. And in recent days they took a brave step - brave in more than one sense - and agreed to describe to us the pressure they say they were subjected to.
More importantly, they seem to have told the authorities too.
Last Friday, in an unusual step - unusual because he was reviewing the separate issue of the defendant's bail conditions - Chief Justice Vincent DeGaetano chose to pass comment on this alleged interference. He said: "In this case it seems that there have been manoeuvres by people who had an interest to see that the case does not reach the courts."
In any scenario, these comments are damning - especially when they are made by the highest judge in the land - since perverting the course of justice, or attempting to do so, is a serious offence. But the Chief Justice went further, pointing out that it seemed that lawyers were involved in these attempts.
A defendant's lawyer is entitled to use many means at his disposal to stoutly represent the interests of his client. But illicit, or even illegal, conduct does not feature among them. It is abhorrent and flies in the face of the long-established principle that an advocate is an officer of the court.
The investigating and prosecuting authorities must take the less-than-subtle hint the Chief Justice has provided and quickly resolve whether the lawyers' conduct in this case was within acceptable boundaries or not.
With the wounds inflicted by a corrupt judge and a yet-to-be-tried former chief justice still wide open, this is not likely to be a pleasant experience. But no doubt they will do it in the same professional manner as they did in the judges' case.
Malta's legal system may suffer some more harm in the meantime, but it will emerge stronger as a result.