Leaving the San Blas murder weapon behind in a torched car could indicate how easy it was to get hold of such a firearm and possibly pass on a covert message to other criminals, according to forensic psychologists.
Kevin Sammut Henwood described Friday’s gangster-style shooting of Raymond Caruana as a carefully planned affair, symptomatic of the string of contract killings carried out over the past three years which have made police investigations difficult through the deliberate tampering or destroying of evidence.
The Kalashnikov AK-47 suspected to be the weapon used in the murder had a special magazine that carried almost twice as many rounds as the standard version, raising suspicions it came from conflict-ridden Libya.
The assault rifle was found in a burnt Opel Corsa abandoned in a field at Tal-Virtù, in Rabat, a 10-minute drive from the farmhouse in Buskett Road, limits of Żebbuġ, where Mr Caruana was gunned down.
The condition in which the weapon was found has not yet been made known.
The fact that he left the weapon behind does not seem to be a mistake
According to Dr Sammut Henwood, the weapon used was indicative of a contract killing, as opposed to more “intimate” murders using what are termed as “improper weapons”, such as knives, scissors or screwdrivers.
The primary aim of such tools is not that of inflicting injury, in contrast with so-called “proper weapons” such as firearms.
Even sporadic killings incorporated a degree of planning – the oft-quoted axiom was that no violence was random or blind. However the utilisation of proper weapons showed a higher degree of preparation, he pointed out.
“It is clear that the crime was very well planned – the location was well examined, the criminal knew of any CCTV cameras and had his escape route planned out.
“He could not simply run off with a large firearm – having such a weapon in your possession makes it easy for you to be detected.”
Fire was very effective in wiping out all signs of evidence – more so than water, which could retain traces of fingerprints or hair.
The weapon, he continued, served its purpose and was disposed of in the same way one would use a pen to sign an important contract and then throw it away.
“Generally such weapons would be stowed away to be used in other crimes. This also seems to showcase the ease with which the perpetrator can acquire a similar firearm. The state of conflict in neighbouring Libya means that it is normal to have a large number of weapons being passed around.”
For Roberta Holland, it seemed very unusual for a perpetrator to go through such careful planning and then not to properly plan the disposal of the murder weapon.
“The weapon is absolutely crucial in every investigation,” she noted.
“It makes it easier for the police to link the crime to other similar crimes and to the people involved. In this context, the fact that he left the weapon behind does not seem to be a mistake.”
The perpetrator’s decision could be attributed to a number of factors. Time was possibly one – setting the car on fire might have been the quickest and easiest way to try and get rid of it.
The perpetrator might also have believed that the fire would have thoroughly destroyed it.
Alternatively, the perpetrator might also be trying to send a message – possibly to other people involved in the turf wars, indicating his involvement.
“The messages he might be trying to send are endless.”
For another forensic psychologist, Janice Formosa Pace, the disposal of the weapon indicated a certain degree of urgency and haste.
“The way it was disposed indicated a jarring level of disorganisation – but arson is also the most effective way of destroying evidence.”
The bullet shells found at the murder scene corresponded to those used by an AK-47, sources had said.
However, forensic tests on the spent bullet casings would have to be done to establish this with certainty and also conclude whether the weapon was used in other murders.