A matching fingerprint on each of three vehicles allegedly broken into by a suspect did not suffice to convince the court of the man’s involvement in the thefts.

Simon Borg, 33, had been summoned for questioning by police investigating three separate reports of thefts from vehicles which took place at Tarxien, Rabat and Lija between 2005 and 2011.

Under interrogation, the suspect had not admitted any involvement in the thefts, answering “I don’t remember” or “I don’t know” all along. He had, however, admitted to a nine-year-long drug problem which occasionally prompted him to break into cars, resorting to theft to sustain his addiction.

The man was eventually charged with the three thefts, voluntary damage to third party property as well as committing such wrongdoing during the operative period of a suspended sentence.

He was further charged as a relapser.

The case pivoted upon the findings of a court-appointed expert who reported a positive match, consisting of one fingerprint on each of the three cars that matched one finger of the accused.

The court, presided over by magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit, observed that this fingerprint was “the only tangible evidence” for the prosecution to prove the accused’s alleged connection to the thefts.

On the basis of case-law on the matter, the court said that not all circumstantial evidence such as this fingerprint carried equal importance and probatory value, adding that it was up to the court to “weigh each piece of evidence” to determine whether the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

In this case, two of the alleged victims had chosen not to testify, whereas the third car owner had not actually witnessed the theft nor had been able to identify the suspect in court.

The accused had put forward no evidence to rebut the scientific proof, the court went on.

However, since the allegedly tell-tale fingerprint had been lifted from the external surface of the vehicles, all parked in a public space, the court was not convinced that it had been left there by the accused when breaking into the cars, thus pronouncing an acquittal.

Lawyers Franco Debono and Marion Camilleri were defence counsel.