Police vs Cassar — Road Rage Threats and Public Disorder

Appeal court upholds conviction for threats and breach of peace after defendant admitted confronting victim aggressively in public.

Criminal Court of Appeal · Honourable Judge Dr. Edwina Grima LL.D. · 24 April 2026

On the morning of 7 December 2023, Mark Cassar approached Carmel Polidano on Dawret il-Gżejjer in St. Paul's Bay in an aggressive and angry manner. According to Polidano, Cassar drove up to his vehicle, began striking it with his fist, and threatened to cut off his head, among other insulting remarks. The confrontation took place in a public area in front of Polidano's employees, who witnessed the incident and were left stunned. Cassar's anger stemmed from what he believed was poor workmanship carried out by Polidano on some garages he owned. In his own testimony before the lower court, Cassar admitted he had approached Polidano angrily, struck the vehicle's window with his fist, and offended him — stating he wanted to show Polidano that he was not afraid of him and that Polidano could be challenged. The Magistrates' Court found Cassar guilty of both charges: making threats or injuries contrary to Article 339(1)(e) of the Criminal Code, and voluntarily breaching public peace and good order under Article 338(dd). He was fined a total of €100 and made subject to a two-year restraining order in favour of Polidano under Article 382A of Chapter 9. Cassar appealed, raising three grounds: that no valid complaint (kwerela) had been filed by the injured party; that the prosecution relied on only one witness; and that the second charge required testimony from members of the public. The Court of Criminal Appeal rejected all three grounds. It found that Polidano had filed a report with police on the day of the incident, that the police were entitled to proceed ex officio under Article 373 of the Criminal Code since the offence involved a public order element and the injured party had not renounced the action within four days. The court also confirmed that under Article 638(2) of the Criminal Code, a conviction can rest on the credible testimony of a single witness, and that Cassar's own admissions corroborated the victim's account fully.

Appeal dismissed. Original conviction of Mark Cassar confirmed in its entirety: guilty on both counts under Articles 339(1)(e) and 338(dd) of the Criminal Code (Chapter 9). Aggregate fine of €100. Two-year restraining order in favour of Carmel Polidano issued under Article 382A of Chapter 9.

• Under Article 373 of the Criminal Code, even where a charge normally requires a private complaint (kwerela), the police may proceed ex officio if the offence involves a public order element or if the injured party neither pursues nor renounces the action within four days of the offence.
• Article 638(2) of the Criminal Code expressly permits a court to convict on the testimony of a single credible witness — corroboration is not a strict legal requirement in Maltese criminal law.
• Article 338(dd) of the Criminal Code (breach of peace) is satisfied when voluntary conduct objectively causes even a minimum of alarm or concern about physical safety in the minds of bystanders — it does not require those bystanders to testify if other evidence establishes the public nature of the incident.
• A defendant's own admissions in testimony can constitute powerful evidence against them; in this case Cassar's in-court statements corroborated the victim's account and helped seal the conviction.
• Maltese courts may issue restraining orders (Ordni ta' Trażżin) under Article 382A of the Criminal Code as a protective measure alongside a fine, even for relatively minor contraventions, where the safety of the injured party so requires.

Criminal Code Chapter 9 — Article 339(1)(e) (threats/injuries), Article 338(dd) (breach of public peace), Article 373 (police action ex officio), Article 382A (restraining orders), Article 638(2) (single witness rule)

Report an error or outdated information