A carer who betrayed the trust of an elderly couple, robbing them of their hard-earned savings and tranquility, was placed under probation and ordered to compensate her victims €20,000.
Rhian Zammit, 30, was prosecuted for aggravated theft of monies belonging to an elderly couple from St Paul’s Bay by whom she had been engaged as carer and who had placed their full trust in her.
“I greatly trusted Rhian and I loved her, that’s why I took it so badly and she knew this well,” the elderly woman had testified in open court, her words quoted in the judgment delivered by magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech who launched a strongly-worded message about the respect owed towards the elderly and other vulnerable members of society.
“Whatever difficulties one might have to face in everyday life, one has no right or excuse to drag other innocent persons into one’s own troubles, especially when those concerned are vulnerable and dependent persons-individuals who deserve greater protection than other members of society,” the court declared.
The court made reference to changes in the law in 2014 introducing harsher punishment to serve as a shield against abuse suffered by elderly or dependent persons.
“The elderly, in particular, deserve and are entitled to only respect and help rather than abuse; to live free of worry or fear over the safety of their person or property which they had worked so hard throughout their life to earn and which they had every right to enjoy,” magistrate Frendo Dimech continued.
In view of the woman’s own admission, registered in open court in May 2018, the court declared her guilty as charged.
When meting out punishment, the court observed that an effective jail term would preclude the accused from retaining a job, thereby earning funds with which to repay her victims.
A suspended sentence, were it to be rendered effective, would only allow a maximum jail term of two years, far below the nine-year maximum imprisonment applicable for the crime committed by the accused.
Having considered the various options of punishment, the court concluded that a probation order would be most suitable since it would act as a strong deterrent whilst serving the best interests of society by ensuring that the wrongdoer would receive help to rehabilitate while being kept under close watch.
Reference was also made to the probation officer’s report wherein it was recorded that “according to Rhian they loved and trusted her……they had grown used to her and loved her dearly”.
Bearing in mind the accused’s admission, her clean criminal record, her remorse for the wrong committed and her will to compensate her victims, the court placed her under a three-year probation order.
Moreover, the court ordered the accused to pay the robbed couple €20,000 within two years by way of compensation, after assessing the monthly income of the victims which covered their daily expenses and needs.
The woman was also ordered to fork out €660.81 by way of court expert expenses.
Inspector Nicholas Vella prosecuted.