In a dramatic turn of events today in Judge Edwina Grima’s Court, Andrew Robert Coles, a key figure in the ongoing Hospitals case, testified that the controversial Harbinson Forensics Report was based solely on the opinions of Jeremy Harbinson himself.
Like Harbinson, Andy Coles also stated that he did not work on any calculations that could justify the unfounded freezing orders totaling €30 million.
Coles, a former British Police Constable and an expert in the Hospitals inquiry, confirmed during cross-examination by defense lawyers representing Dr. Joseph Muscat, Dr. Konrad Mizzi, and Keith Schembri and others that the Harbinson Forensics Report was explicitly presented as the opinions of Jeremy Harbinson. This clarification aligns with previous statements made by Harbinson himself within the report, which emphasized that the document was not intended to serve as a foundation for legal actions, such as the freezing orders or potential charges.
Harbinson had earlier distanced himself from the freezing orders and the definition of charges, asserting that the experts involved in the Hospitals inquiry were not asked to support these legal actions.
Furthermore, Harbinson himself admitted that the forensics report should never have been disclosed or utilized in the way it has been.
Jeremy Harbinson
The defense lawyers’ challenge of the freezing orders, which have been a point of contention throughout the case, now has added weight. Coles’ testimony clarifies that the freezing orders could not have been based on an expert report that, in Harbinson’s own words, was not meant to be used for prosecution or freezing orders.
As the case continues, this latest revelation casts doubt on the validity of the €30 million freezing orders.
