The trial by jury of Ikechukwu Stephen Egbo, the Nigerian accused of drug conspiracy, is drawing towards its final stage.
The panel of jurors, five men and four women, were today addressed by the defence and the prosecution who delivered their final submissions. The arguments primarily hinged upon the credibility of the drug courier turned police collaborator, Attila Somlyai.
The 30-year old Romanian, discovered with 60 capsules containing 600 grammes of cocaine inside his stomach following his arrival from Düsseldorf back in November 2010, gave a detailed account of his role in the drug-trafficking racket when testifying yesterday before the jury.
The man is currently serving a nine-year prison term after being sentenced by a criminal court in 2014 over his part-involvement in the conspiracy. Under cross-examination, he declared that the police had offered him “a deal” for collaborating in the sting operation which led to the arrest of Mr Egbo.
Lawyer Simon Micallef Stafrace, assisting the accused, pointed out that court expert Martin Bajada had concluded that no communication had been traced between Mr Somlyai and the accused, contradicting what had been declared earlier by the courier.
Secondly, at no time did Mr Somlyai appear in the supermarket CCTV footage aired yesterday in court. While the footage showed Mr Egbo walking down the aisles, Mr Somlyai was never in sight. “That footage does not prove anything,” the defence emphasised.
Dr Micallef Stafrace also criticised certain procedural shortcomings of the prosecution, remarking that one expected a higher degree of professionalism from officers who had been working in the drug squad for a long time.
No proof had been put forward to support Mr Somlyai’s allegation that the accused had run out of the supermarket. Indeed, the case of the prosecution rested solely on the testimony of the star witness who was lying, the defence argued.
“There was no material evidence linking the accused to the drug” the defence concluded.
Replying to these arguments, the prosecution pointed out that Mr Somlyai was currently paying for his criminal wrongdoing even though he had assisted the police.
Lawyer Giannella Busuttil deplored the harsh reality of the drug world where traffickers preyed upon vulnerable individuals, luring them to undergo serious risks in return for a meagre payment. Not only did couriers risk being arrested, but they also ran serious health risks by swallowing dangerous drug-filled capsules.
Countering the defence’s argument that no money had been found on the person of the accused at the time of arrest, Dr Busuttil remarked that payment was never entrusted to the courier delivering the drug.
The CCTV footage was not to be taken in isolation, but all the circumstances had to be considered, stressed the prosecutor. If all the circumstantial evidence pointed to one direction then it was significant and had to be relied upon, said the lawyer. “In this case we have a lot of circumstantial evidence.”
This evidence indicated that the accused was “very, very much well aware” of the drug deal. He had gone to the Roma hotel “for a very specific purpose” of collecting the 60 capsules brought by Mr Somlyai upon the instructions of the “boss” in the Netherlands.
Jurors are to be addressed by the judge shortly.
Madame Justice Edwina Grima is presiding over the court. Lawyers Simon Micallef Stafrace and Marc Sant are defence counsel.