Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2


a. just to confirm Maps A or B?
b. (too soft on the act of perverting the course of justice and Perjury) e.g.
Superintendent Simon Galea’s suspicions and demands “I was very clear with Mr. Attard, I told him how did you find these
glasses here? Did you come here at anytime before? That is I had this suspicion that these glasses, a piece of these glasses
could have been planted there during the night or early in the morning. But Mr. Attard & Ms. Attard kept on saying that they
had found it at that moment”. As explained fully in paragraph number (5).

The Court {I am going to read to you the evidence which you had tendered before the Court Expert. See if you can confirm it
on Oath}. “I state that I am recognising the brown glasses found on the ground at the side of the road as being mine. I
confirm that these glasses were on my head when the incident occurred yesterday and this is showing the site. From these
glasses I can establish the place where the incident occurred etc.”.

The Attards had possession of these glasses, to some time later perhaps the next day plant this material evidence at site A, of
which it has been established by Superintendent Simon Galea’s suspicion, witnesses and the Police investigation that this was
not the incident site that was indicated by the Attards.

This also highlights the acute possibility that after the actual incident and hospital, someone with some strength and calculated
aggression must have deliberately smashed to smithereens these glasses in order to plant this material evidence to convince the
authorities and the investigative team of a version proven in actuality to be untrue.

a. Mr. Attard himself has admitted that there was a queue! And that the Defendant was driving straight.
b. Mr. Shepherd said under Oath before the Courts that they did NOT have to brake hard at any moment? And there was no
screeching of tyres?
c. And again at the Splash & Fun roundabout.
d. With no street lighting.

a. Wrong: The Defendant would not have crashed into Mr. Attard as his vehicle was in front. All the defendant did was when
warning BRAKE lights glared on progressing down the hill, the Defendant touched and activated accordingly his brake to
continue this safety event. It was Mr. Attard behind that came to a screeching out of control stop.
b. Yet Mr. Attard claims he did not put on the indicators and did not pull on his steering right hand side down to go around the
defendant, that he just kept going straight?
c. If they saw why would they ask what happened?

a. The honest version of the Defendant which with medical proof of bruising around the neck of the Defendant is also
consistent with how the Defendant was bitten.

a. it is in reality hard to believe that a man of such size and weight would not resist such an attempt as claimed? If it were
believed that such an impossible accusation took place then this would make incredibly the Defendant who weighed just 69kg
the strongest Homo sapien ever known to Humanity!

a. Ms. Shepherd proves that Mr. Attard was not unconscious but fighting otherwise there would be nothing for Ms. Attard &
Ramona to separate.

Note: the getting out of their car Mr. Shepherd states he was already out checking the damage on the car and then walked 6
metres to see what Mr. Attard and the defendant were talking about yet contradict ally Ms. Attard states varyingly that she told
him to get out only after the fight between Mr. Attard and the defendant had already started?

a. Mr. Attard has always stated that he was always with the defendant fighting in front of the Sierra and only for 2 seconds (he
fell) does not know what happened, it was also here the end of the only fight between Mr. Attard and the defendant. It is
precisely at this supposed 2 seconds that Ms. Attard has confirmed that (he was thrown) and from here she pushed the
defendant back to the Punto saying go police etc. with Ramona present. Proving absolutely that the defendant could not have
gone for Mr. Shepherd who was already on the ground along side the Sierra as witnessed by all the Briffas while Mr. Attard
and the defendant in front of the Sierra was fighting (not unconscious thrown or fell) and on their arrival it was the end of this
fight. As collaborated by Ramona.

a. Mr. Shepherd has no other injuries or marks on his person to support the alleged kicking of him while he was laid out on
the ground.
b. There is Ms. Attard & Mr. Shepherd who contradict ally in manner and execution which is not in harmony with the timeline
of events, claim that the defendant kicked Mr. Shepherd? (This makes 2 witnesses) Ms. Attard has already committed perjury
with the planting of her glasses and Mr. Shepherd is clearly not credible e.g. no braking, not recognising which bonnet and not
remembering giving a statement or the Inspector or court expert. There is Ms. Shepherd who never mentions any kicking, then
that her husband was thrown and then that he was kicked while on the ground. (This makes 3 witnesses in total) yet Ms.
Shepherd is also not credible e.g. the punto was pressing behind the Sierra, she did not see how Ms. Attard was hit then she
saw her punched, then the tunnel swerving, fuck and obscene gesture?

Against the defendant and Ramona and Mr. Attard and all 4 Briffas (making 7 witnesses).

a. In front of the Sierra including Ms. Shepherd, Mr. & Ms. Attard, Ramona and the defendant!
b. However it is possible that after the time before they got to the hospital or that Mr. Shepherd is an exception as not all
persons suffering from a fit experience the ectal phase, that indeed Mr. Shepherd did have a seizure especially of the
disposition declared by himself and his family and friend that if he gets worried he gets a fit?
c. back or left of head?

a. Neuton’s law of motion - for every action there is a reaction.
b. Mr. Shepherd neither has any injuries, bruising or reddening to his face or chest where depending on the version he was
supposedly punched or kicked with such force to render him unconscious?

Note: Mr. Shepherd amongst others claimed that he approached the defendant at the front of the Sierra where they intervened
and he fell unconscious? How then was he found neatly along the side of the car. If a person is knocked out they would fall on
the spot in a tangled heap. Research: knocked out by a blow to the head only? How would he know he was kicked after etc?
(kicking motion to the right)?

a. Also Saviour has stated that they were far from the white car, and Mr. Attard has also stated that the defendant was not near
the scene while he was in front of his Sierra while Mr. Shepherd was on the ground. This all indicates that Ruben Briffa has
committed Perjury.
b. Further proven with Ms. Attard who supposedly never saw Ruben doing anything, while Ruben claims he gave Mr.
Shepherd to her and Ms. Shepherd? A complete lie!

a. The doctor did not certify this as grievous!

a. Doctor discrepancies?
 The blatant Tunnel contradictions?
 356 no medical certificate - Human Rights to a fair trial?
 Why no investigation was never conducted into the suspicions of the planting of evidence at a scene that was not actually
the incident scene? The committing of perjury and perverting the course of justice?
 Case law examples?
 The inaccuracies of the submissions of the prosecution?