A motorist who admitted to having acquired VRT 'pass' certificates for his two cars without actually taking them for the tests was spared an effective jail term by an appeals court on Wednesday.
Godfrey Formosa, 40, had landed a 3-year effective jail term and a €150 fine after pleading guilty to having unlawfully obtained VRT certificates for a Ford Transit and a Mustang without either of the vehicles undergoing the relative testing.
He had been charged with trading in influence, making use of the false certificates, falsifying the documents and making use of a vehicle without a valid road licence.
He had refused legal assistance, pleading guilty to the charges whilst under the impression that the offences to which he was admitting were the same as those mentioned by the police during his interrogation and in respect of which he had released two statements.
After his conviction, he engaged a lawyer to file an appeal seeking to revoke the effective jail term which was deemed to be ‘disproportionate.’
In the course of appeal proceedings it emerged that when the police interrogated Mr Formosa, their questions clearly pointed in the direction of a different crime, possibly bribery, but certainly not trading in influence which carried a heftier punishment.
In his second statement, Mr Formosa had admitted that he had paid €80 and €50 respectively to have a Ford Transit and a Mustang certified with a ‘pass’ without subjecting them to the testing process.
This scenario did not amount to the crime of trading in influence which involves three players, where one person hands over money to a second so that the latter can unlawfully influence a third individual to do something contrary to law.
“How could the accused ever have guessed that there would be a change in the charges from the time when he released his statement to the moment of his arraignment?” defence lawyer Stefano Filletti argued.
The argument was upheld by the court of criminal appeal, presided by Madam Justice Edwina Grima, who observed that at no stage in his statement hadMr Formosa's declarations indicated that he had committed the crime of trading in influence.
The man had paid directly the two employees at the VRT stations who had issued the false certificates, the court observed, adding that the third player had been missing.
In the light of such circumstances, the court upheld the appeal, declared Mr Formosa not guilty of trading in influence and falsifying the documents, whilst confirming his guilt in having made use of the false certificates and allowed the use of a vehicle that lacked a valid licence.
The court thereby varied the punishment to a 1-year jail term suspended for two years and a €100 fine.
Lawyer Stefano Filletti was counsel to the appellant