An inquiry into the Paqpaqli għall-Istrina car crash tragedy was riddled with irregularities, a defence lawyer for one of the event organisers told a court today.
"Are we to let this go by as if there is no tomorrow? All of us are tired of innumerable efforts to patch things up. We should not play with people's lives in this way," lawyer Joe Giglio said as criminal proceedings against the members of the event's core committee continued today.
READ: Dozens injured as supercar crashes at Paqpaqli motor show
Dr Giglio told the court presided by magistrate Aaron Bugeja that experts had been appointed to help police inspectors, when normally such experts are nominated to assist the court.
The lawyer argued that John Gera, an expert appointed to report on health and safety issues concerning the accident site, had gone beyond his remit and based his conclusions on the testimony of various witness as well as on certain documents collected.
IT expert Martin Bajada had been present while members of the core committee testified to the inquiry, Dr Giglio said, arguing that this too was not correct.
Four policed officers who were on the scene of the crime had drawn up two separate reports, rather than the unified report the inquiring magistrate had asked for, the court was told. Police officer Patrick Farrugia came up with a report, while his three colleagues presented another report.
READ: 13 arraigned over Paqpaqli crash
Dr Giglio argued that in some cases criminal inquiries had come to resemble the Inquisition, "where questions are fired from all directions." Traditionally such inquiries were conducted by a magistrate who would ask questions in an orderly manner and reach a conclusion within 60 days, he said.
Other defence lawyers seconded these submissions of Dr Giglio. Lawyer Robert Abela, appearing for one of the men charged, further stressed that in the light of an appeal decision against court-appointed expert Martin Bajada, reports drawn up by the latter had been cast in doubt.
Although the majority of the defence lawyers argued that the findings of the inquiry were riddled with irregularities and were thus to be discarded, lawyers Stephen Tonna Lowell and Giannella DeMarco appearing for Paul Bailey argued that it would be premature to remove these findings from the records of the case.
Whilst not denying the irregularities, the findings of the inquiry still hold weight, they argued. Lawyer Stefano Filletti agreed.
Throughout the hearing, Mr Bailey was assisted by an expert simultaneous interpreter called in after a request by his defence counsel during previous sitting.
The case continues in February.