A man declared guilty of a snatch and run handbag theft at the expense of a lap dancer had his effective jail term converted to a suspended sentence on appeal.

Libyan national Ali Ibrahim Wadi had been targeted by criminal prosecution as the prime suspect behind the theft which took place on a morning in June 2014 inside an apartment block in St Julian’s.

The unsuspecting woman had just been returning home from work when she came across a stranger in the common area of the block.

The stranger, whose face she had just managed to glimpse in the lit area, grabbed her bag, containing an empty wallet, some perfume and clothes, and disappeared from sight.

The following day, she spotted a customer at the night club where she danced and informed security that the man was the same person who had robbed her bag the night before.

A police report was filed and the suspect was subsequently arrested and charged with the handbag theft, escaping custody while being led out of the police van, and refusing to give his particulars under police questioning. He was also charged with cannabis possession, after a personal search had yielded plastic sachets, two bearing traces of the drug, and €700 in cash.

The man was eventually found guilty and given a 12-month effective jail term and a €1,000 fine by a Magistrates’ Court.

He filed an appeal and arguing that the conviction had pinned upon the testimony of the victim, who lacked credibility. Moreover, the prosecution had not proven that the accused had failed to supply his details under police questioning.

The Court of Criminal Appeal, presided over by Madam Justice Edwina Grima, rejected the first ground of appeal but upheld the other ground, declaring that the police had asked for the man’s particulars after arresting and handcuffing him.

Once his state of arrest had kicked off, the suspect had every right not to answer the officer’s questions, the court observed, thereby clearing him of this accusation.

As for the punishment, the court observed that although still well within legal parameters, the punishment was to be mitigated as the accused was a first time offender.

For this reason, the court varied the 12-month effective jail term to the same term suspended for four years.

Lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Rene Darmanin were defence counsel.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.