A man and a woman, who pleaded not guilty last week to their alleged involvement in an attack upon a woman’s car at Żabbar, were spared preventive arrest when the Attorney General lost his bid to revoke their bail.
Natasha Bugeja, 20 and Ismael Magro, 19, both from Vittoriosa, were arraigned on Wednesday alongside Tyson Bugeja, 23, all three pleading not guilty to having allegedly been involved in the violent episode targeting Tyson’s ex-girlfriend.
Shortly before the incident at Żabbar, the woman reported to the police that she had been receiving threatening phone calls from her ex who, later turned up outside her home, together with a man and a woman and allegedly proceeded to smash the rear windscreen of her parked car.
The other man, later identified as Ismael Magro, had allegedly walked about during the attack, while the woman, identified as Natasha Bugeja, sprinkled the contents of a jerry can onto the victim’s car.
CCTV footage from the scene of crime had led to the arrest of the trio.
Tyson and Natasha Bugeja were jointly charged with causing voluntary damage to third party property and breach of bail, with the former also being separately charged with misuse of electronic communications equipment, threats against the alleged victim and causing her to fear violence.
Mr Magro was charged as an accomplice and driving without a valid licence and insurance cover.
While Mr Bugeja was remanded in custody, the other co-accused were granted bail.
However, following the arraignment, the Attorney General filed a request before the Criminal Court asking for that bail to be revoked, mainly because the alleged victim was still to testify, thus implying a real risk of tampering with evidence.
Moreover, the gravity of the alleged offences did not merit bail, while the accused could not fulfil the necessary guarantees.
The defence lawyers countered that the prosecution had not objected to bail during the arraignment and that adequate bail conditions had been imposed to allay the fear of tampering with evidence.
The Criminal Court, presided over by Madam Justice Edwina Grima, declared that there was no reason for varying the discretion exercised by the Magistrate’s Court which had assessed all the circumstances of the case and more so since the prosecution had raised no concern regarding such risk of tampering.
In her decree, Madam Justice Grima also observed that adequate bail conditions had been imposed, in addition to a Protection Order in favour of the alleged victim.
Moreover, so far, both Natasha Bugeja and Ismael Magro appeared to have abided by the set conditions, the Court observed.
Apart from such considerations, the Court noted that the AG’s application in respect of Mr Magro lacked certain legal formalities essential for its validity, namely the AG’s signature was missing and the act of the arraignment had not been duly stamped.
In the light of all such considerations, the court turned down the AG’s request, decreeing that bail was to stand.
Lawyers Franco Debono, Amadeus Cachia and Arthur Azzopardi were defence counsel to Ms Bugeja, while Dr Azzopardi also assisted Mr Magro.