Wanted Man Was Never Employed At Malta’s Presidential Palace, Official Statement Clarifies
News circulated yesterday of a wanted man declaring that he was working at the Presidential Palace while on the run from authorities. However, an official statement clarified Tristan Farrugia Tedesco was never employed by the Office of the President.
Farrugia Tedesco was hired by a private contractor without notice to deliver material to people doing work in the Palace, according to the architect in charge of the ongoing works at Sant’Anton Palace.
“The Office of the President has never had an employment relationship with the mentioned person.”
The 27-year-old was arraigned before Magistrate Elaine Merceica yesterday. He was accused of breaching bail conditions that he was placed under in 2022. He was further charged with resisting police at the Birkirkara station, failing to obey orders, interfering in the execution of their duties, and voluntary damage to the lockup at the Police HQ after he broke a lamp.
Farrugia Tedesco is also being investigated for thefts and after evading police, he turned himself in on Sunday.
“They stopped me from working,” he told the court. “I was working for [President] George Vella, installing some balustrades, but because I was wanted they called me up and told me not to go to work.”
After the sitting, Farrugia Tedesco told MaltaToday that he had been employed by a contractor.
The defendant initially pleaded guilty to the charges but seemed uncertain after being warned that his bail security money in his other cases could be confiscated if he did. His lawyer, Noel Bianco, then withdrew his admission and Farrugia Tedesco pleaded not guilty.
The lawyer asked the court for the defendant to be treated for a drug problem during his incarceration, something that Farrugia Tedesco has been trying to quit for “seven years”.
Bianco asked the court to recommend the director of CCF to Farrugia Tedesco begin the rehabilitation process while providing him with the necessary medical assistance. The prosecution did not object to the requests and these were subsequently upheld by the court.
What do you make of this development?