Malta Court Rules in Favor of Crypto Trader in €700K Fraud Case After Years of Delays

by

Malta Court Upholds Rights of Crypto Trader in €700K Fraud Case

Key Highlights

  • Malta court rules Milton’s right to a fair hearing was violated after years-long delays in his €700,000 crypto fraud trial.
  • Investigators struggled for years to unlock Milton’s mobile phone, the key piece of evidence, despite international expert help.
  • Court sets six-month deadline for prosecution to present phone data or close evidence; costs to be borne by the State.

Luke John Milton, a cryptocurrency trader from Malta, has successfully argued in court that the long wait for his trial in a €700,000 fraud case violated his right to a speedy and fair hearing. He was accused of cryptocurrency fraud amounting to approximately $810,617.

For years, the investigation remained stuck because detectives couldn’t get into Milton’s phone – a crucial piece of evidence in the case.

The charges

Milton is accused of several crimes, including fraud exceeding €5,000 (about $5,790), money laundering, stealing cryptocurrency, possessing stolen property, and violently resisting police. He’s also accused of having items used to commit fraud. According to a report by Malta Today, the alleged victim lost around €700,000 in cryptocurrency.

In June 2021, Milton was arrested and brought before a court. Authorities also took his phone. They requested he give them the password or unlock it, but he wouldn’t.

Attempts to access the phone

On June 28, 2021, the court asked IT specialist Keith Cutajar to retrieve data from Milton’s phone and thoroughly examine everything on it.

Problems quickly arose with accessing the device. Cutajar explained to the court that he didn’t have the necessary tools and asked for assistance from a company abroad. The court then approved the use of a lab run by U.S. Homeland Security Investigations to help.

Investigators faced difficulties even with help from experts. Cutajar later clarified that accessing the phone involved a two-step procedure, with one step reliant on technology that hadn’t been invented yet. When asked how long it would take to create this technology, he admitted it could take anywhere from one to ten years.

As of June 2023, authorities were still unable to access the phone. The court then put the case on hold with no future hearing scheduled, essentially suspending it for an indefinite period.

Constitutional challenge

On August 11, 2023, Milton argued in a court filing that the lengthy delays were a violation of his right to a fair trial. He requested the court to establish a firm and reasonable deadline for the prosecution to finish presenting their evidence.

He explained that the lengthy legal battle had significantly impacted his life. He’d been restricted in his freedom, his finances were frozen, and a process that usually takes a few months had dragged on for over two years.

State’s response

Milton’s request was denied by the State Advocate, Attorney General, and Commissioner of Police, who explained that the case is still active and his phone holds crucial evidence. They confirmed investigators had already explored every possible lead, even consulting international experts.

They also claimed the delay could have been avoided if Milton had provided the password.

Court’s ruling

The Constitutional Court pointed out that even though Milton wouldn’t unlock his device, it’s still the prosecution’s job to gather evidence. While someone accused of a crime has the right to stay silent, the government still needs to move the case forward without unnecessary delay.

The judges noted that the case hadn’t moved forward since August 2021. Although there’s a chance new technology could now unlock the phone, it wasn’t certain to work. The court decided this delay meant Milton hadn’t received a fair and timely hearing.

Remedy and deadline

The court ruled that if the phone data isn’t submitted within six months of the final decision, the prosecutor must end their case. While no financial compensation was ordered at this time, the parties involved were jointly responsible for covering the legal costs of the constitutional case.

Stefano Filletti and Nicole Galea represented Milton in court. Judge Ian Spiteri Bailey issued the ruling.

Read More

2026-03-06 13:57