A man has been cleared of injuring his wife in an argument nine years ago after the court was presented with different versions of the incident, during which the woman broke an arm.

The 64-year old company director from Attard and his wife had been going through turbulent times after 25 years of marriage and ultimately launched separation proceedings.

The umpteenth row broke out late one October evening in 2010 at the couple’s home. Their teenage son went downstairs to find his mother sitting on the floor close to the bathroom, nursing a swollen arm.

A police report was filed and charges were issued against the man, who was accused of having grievously injured his wife and caused her to fear violence. The man protested his innocence from the start.

Magistrate Neville Camilleri, who was assigned the case in 2015, observed that in spite of all the evidence and the “harsh antagonism and animosity” displayed by both parties, the alleged victim’s version had not been proved.

The woman had claimed that her ‘violent’ husband had forcefully shoved her, causing her to topple over, landing on her back and injuring her arm.

On the other hand, the man claimed that his wife had tried to grab his mobile phone while he stood with his back to her in the bathroom and he had dodged to avoid a kick. The movement had caused her to slip and injure herself in the fall.

The son had not witnessed the incident, testifying only that he had heard shouting, screaming and crying.

The court observed that both versions were realistic and that the woman’s injuries could have been caused either way. It could not conclude that the victim’s version was “more realistic or closer to the truth.” Mere speculation or conjectures without sufficient evidence could not lead to a conviction, declared the court, thus acquitting the accused of all charges.

Lawyer Kathleen Calleja Grima was defence counsel.