p3 – Michael Cassar Ass. Police Commissioner – His Biased Witness


M. Cassar:   No. The post office informed me about them and I never saw them because they were in a closed sack. They gave them to me and I passed them on. (How did these letters get to the post office and who took them there? How did the post office workers know they were what the police were looking for? Also, how did the police know what was in the envelopes without opening them? There could have been anything in them. A senior investigating officer fails to check the contents of the sack in the presence of the forensic officer receiving the evidence).

Defence:   Why did the post give them to you? Did you give any directive to the post office or showed them any envelope samples so that if they came across any letters like them they will intercept them and pass them on to you.

M. Cassar:   There was hundreds of letters that were being sent that were identical except for the handwriting that varied from one to the other. The envelopes were all the same. The stamps although they were not the same they were very similar. In fact those that I received from the public without opening them by looking at the envelope without looking at the contents I would pass them on to forensics straight away.

(Witness fails to answer the question directly. It still leaves the question “how did the postal workers know which envelopes to keep back for the police?” A variety of handwriting confirms that the police knew from the outset that there was a number of people involved but only Joseph Ellul-Grech was arrested, investigated, humiliated). 

Defence:   Now you told us that on the envelopes there was some handwriting?

 M. Cassar:   Yes.

Defence:   The addresses on them the name of the person who had to receive the letter were handwritten.

M. Cassar:   Yes.

Defence:   Now the handwriting form one letter to the other, were they the same hand?

M. Cassar:   No not by the same hand. At least that is how it looked but there again I am not a handwriting expert. But as a personal opinion I do not think that it was the same handwriting.

(Witness confirming that there was more than one person involved. This demonstrates his determination to convict an innocent person).

Defence:   So we can agree that it could not have been one person that sent them.

M. Cassar:   Yes at least we agree that the handwriting was not that of one person.

Defence:   Now, you know that when a letter is received by post there is a stamp on it indicating where it was sent. 

M. Cassar:   Yes.

Defence:   Now, did you verify if the letters that were sent by post came from one place or different parts of Malta and Gozo?

M. Cassar:   In fact I gave instructions to inspector Raymond Cremona to Mr. Barbaro Sant at the post office to nominate an employee and work with forensic so that he will have direct access and he will be able to see where these were being sent from, the dates and the time they were sent. To gather as much information as possible. I have not received the report. Yes to the question and work that you are saying I did do. (None of the experts appointed by the court ever submitted such a report. This leaves many questions unanswered).

Defence:   That has been done. But are you in a position to give us any information.

M. Cassar:   No the report has not arrived verbal or handwritten. I can say that the court did not appoint an expert for this purpose.

Defence:   You mean that we still have to see this report?  

M. Cassar:   Sure. Perhaps I missed to say something and I wish to say that while being under arrest and during the statement some handwriting samples were taken from the defendant by inspector Raymond Cremona and myself and also the next day a very detailed one from the expert nominated by the court Mr. Ivan Formosa. In fact Mr. Ivan Formosa took more than one. (That was the day after the defendant was arrested, had been taken to hospital for treatment and had a doctor brought to him while in the lock up. There was also two long periods of questioning, one the night before and another that morning (16/11/99). After all that the defendant was subjected to a three hour writing test).

Defence:   Fine. Do you have any results?

M. Cassar:   No because I do not speak to a court expert. I am not saying this as an excuse but I do no speak to him.

Defence:   Meaning that the moment that you decided to arraign this man into court you were not in a position and to day two weeks after you cannot say one hundred percent beyond reasonable doubt that the handwriting on those envelopes belong or do not belong to Mr. Ellul Grech or not. From the date that you arraigned him in court to date you are not in a position to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the handwriting that there is on these letters some of which came into your possession because they were passed on to you by the people that received them the handwriting on them belonged to Mr. Ellul Grech?

M. Cassar:   No can I explain your Honour. As I have already said the handwriting was that of more than one person. But this is my opinion.

M. Cassar:   As I have already replied and he liked it the handwriting were not……

Defence:   No but….

Mr. Cassar:   Can I answer?

Defence:   You are going the long way about it.

M. Cassar:   As I have said the handwriting was not that of the person I and other investigators saw the handwriting samples that belonged to Mr. Ellul Grech. We saw several handwritings on the envelopes and there was a similarity that was identical (contradiction) and that was one of the charges. There were a number of crimes that we charged him with when we arraigned him in court. Falsification was one of them. Maybe I am diverting from the question.

(Earlier on this incompetent and unreliable prosecution witness stated that there was not a handwriting expert available. However, he decided that one of the handwritings was similar).

Defence:   So you are saying that hundreds were sent and you do not exclude that it could be thousands?

M. Cassar:   I do not know. 

Defence:   At least one of the letters, I would like to ask you a question in a different way. To date you have not got one letter that results that the handwriting on the envelope belongs to him. Reply yes or no. 

M. Cassar:   To me and the other officers, yes. (A few minutes earlier Michael Cassar confirmed that he is no handwriting expert. His determination to convict an innocent person made him change his mind and became a handwriting expert).

Defence:   How? 

M. Cassar:   You are not listening to what I am saying. 

Defence:   You came to this conclusion that the handwriting was his without having it verified and confirmed by a forensic expert and you have not done so to date? Reply…

M. Cassar:   But I cannot tell you yes or no. You have to give me a chance to give my witness.

Magistrate:   But this is statutory.

M. Cassar:   Perhaps if he gives me a chance I will reply.

Magistrate:   However, on this point the forensic expert had not concluded.

M. Cassar:   However, on top of this there are other things that the defence is missing.

Defence:   In that case I will ask you about them.

M. Cassar:   No I am going to reply because I am the witness here.

Magistrate:   Tell us tell us Mr. Cassar.

M. Cassar:   Excluding the handwriting that remains an opinion and it has to be confirmed by an expert there is other evidence that has to surface. And what is the evidence? The evidence is document Y that was found at his house. It was a voluntary declaration that no one else in the world had those documents. So if no one else in the world had those documents what doubt is there for the investigators to arraign him and be held here.

(The defendant always insisted that there were only two people he knew of that could have had the bank statements. The defendant and John Dalli. The defendant always protested his innocence and accused EU Commissioner John Dalli of organising the sending of the letters).

Defence:   So on what is this opinion based? The handwriting or other things?

M. Cassar:   What do you mean?

Defence:   You reached an opinion that one of the handwritings is his meaning Mr. Ellul Grech. Now in your witness you gave your opinion. Now I am asking you for your opinion. On what is that opinion is based, did it come from heaven above or did you see the envelopes and compared the signature with that of Mr. Ellul Grech.


M. Cassar - His False Witness P11

M. Cassar - His False Witness P12

M. Cassar - His False Witness P13

M. Cassar - His False Witness P14