Grace Millane
-
The jury is now being talked through the difference between murder and manslaughter, as a part of Justice Simon Moore's address.
âOnly if you do not find the accused guilty of murder, do you go on to consider manslaughter,â Moore says to the jury.
"It is only at that point does the issue of consent comes in. Consent is not a defence to murder,â
The defence does not dispute the accused applied pressure to Grace's neck, which resulted in her death, the court is told.
But there is more than one way to commit culpable homicide, or a blame-worthy killing of one person by another, he says.
One definition of murder is the intention to kill.
However, "reckless intent" can also result in murder, the jury is told.
If the accused applied pressure to Grace's neck with the intention of causing injury, knowing his actions could cause death, and carried on regardless - that is also murder, Justice Moore tells the jury.
-
@taniwharugby said in Grace Millane:
and carried on regardless - that is also murder, Justice Moore tells the jury.
Key point possibly and carried on regardless - that is also murder, Justice Moore tells the jury.
-
-
Gee the herald is really flogging this all they canât arenât they. If updated daily reports wasnât enough now we have this special âfinal daysâ article. I assume 75% of the feralds âjournalistsâ are working day and night on this story.
What are they going to do when itâs over? -
@Virgil said in Grace Millane:
Gee the herald is really flogging this all they canât arenât they. If updated daily reports wasnât enough now we have this special âfinal daysâ article. I assume 75% of the feralds âjournalistsâ are working day and night on this story.
What are they going to do when itâs over?Go back to trawling twitter for trending clickbait that they can cut and paste?
-
I'm really none the wiser at the moment.
There is one piece of presented evidence though that bugs me. The internet searches in the early hours.
The prosecution says he was searching how to dispose of the body (very likely) the defence says they were random (very unlikely).
If searching how to dispose then either she was dead already or (the sinister option) he could see an opportunity to kill someone and blame it on BDSM so was planning.
I am going to discard the second option as it defies logic. Why not kill her and then phone police with concocted story?
That leaves the more likely scenario which is that he knew she was dead.
He says that he didn't know until he woke later. Why, even after admitting killing her, is he holding onto this likely lie? What is the relevance of the timing? What does he know that makes it relevant (but we don't)?
He says he was too drunk to even know she was dead and crashed out in the shower. But then sober enough to randomly type 'hottest fire' and 'Waitakere' into his phone? Just doesn't ring true.That unanswered question has me casting more doubt on the defence than the prosecution but the defence doesn't have to prove itself only the prosecution does.
-
I'd be surprised if they don't appeal.
-
-
@No-Quarter Agree, although that would normally be after sentencing. Guessing he will get life with 10 years non-parole, which is the minimum, unless there is something particularly vicious about it that wasn't apparent from the trial reports.
-
@canefan said in Grace Millane:
@Virgil said in Grace Millane:
Guilty!!
All things considered I think it is the right decision. All of the stuff this guy did after the killing were not the actions of a man panicking about an accidental death
I actually think that they could be. Not 'normal' behaviour, sure, but not in the realm of not possible.
The key is 'accidental'. As explained above the expert evidence was that an accident would be very difficult to achieve. Add to that the continued lie about internet searches and the suspicion is that he knew what he had done because at some point he decided to do it (or continue with it) -
@Godder said in Grace Millane:
@No-Quarter Agree, although that would normally be after sentencing. Guessing he will get life with 10 years non-parole, which is the minimum, unless there is something particularly vicious about it that wasn't apparent from the trial reports.
Can someone in the know tell me why it will be Feb before sentencing?
-
@Crucial said in Grace Millane:
I'm really none the wiser at the moment.
There is one piece of presented evidence though that bugs me. The internet searches in the early hours.
The prosecution says he was searching how to dispose of the body (very likely) the defence says they were random (very unlikely).
If searching how to dispose then either she was dead already or (the sinister option) he could see an opportunity to kill someone and blame it on BDSM so was planning.
I am going to discard the second option as it defies logic. Why not kill her and then phone police with concocted story?
That leaves the more likely scenario which is that he knew she was dead.
He says that he didn't know until he woke later. Why, even after admitting killing her, is he holding onto this likely lie? What is the relevance of the timing? What does he know that makes it relevant (but we don't)?
He says he was too drunk to even know she was dead and crashed out in the shower. But then sober enough to randomly type 'hottest fire' and 'Waitakere' into his phone? Just doesn't ring true.That unanswered question has me casting more doubt on the defence than the prosecution but the defence doesn't have to prove itself only the prosecution does.
On the news tonight, they said records were taken off his phone. Presumably after Grace died he searched
Waitakere ranges
Hottest fire
Porn
Took photos of her naked body
PornEven vaguely normal behavior for a panic stricken man?
-
@canefan said in Grace Millane:
@Crucial said in Grace Millane:
I'm really none the wiser at the moment.
There is one piece of presented evidence though that bugs me. The internet searches in the early hours.
The prosecution says he was searching how to dispose of the body (very likely) the defence says they were random (very unlikely).
If searching how to dispose then either she was dead already or (the sinister option) he could see an opportunity to kill someone and blame it on BDSM so was planning.
I am going to discard the second option as it defies logic. Why not kill her and then phone police with concocted story?
That leaves the more likely scenario which is that he knew she was dead.
He says that he didn't know until he woke later. Why, even after admitting killing her, is he holding onto this likely lie? What is the relevance of the timing? What does he know that makes it relevant (but we don't)?
He says he was too drunk to even know she was dead and crashed out in the shower. But then sober enough to randomly type 'hottest fire' and 'Waitakere' into his phone? Just doesn't ring true.That unanswered question has me casting more doubt on the defence than the prosecution but the defence doesn't have to prove itself only the prosecution does.
On the news tonight, they said records were taken off his phone. Presumably after Grace died he searched
Waitakere ranges
Hottest fire
Porn
Took photos of her naked body
PornEven vaguely normal behavior for a panic stricken man?
Not at all. Didn't we go through this pages ago? Define 'normal'.
What his actions do though is look consistent with someone that knows they have a dead body and are deciding what to do. The defence said those actions were random and he didn't discover she was dead until later.
That is the bit that beggars belief and if he insists on lying about that then the 'panicked path followed by full disclosure' argument doesn't hold up. -
-
@Godder said in Grace Millane:
@Crucial have to get a pre-sentence report and take into account Christmas/New Year.
Bit rough on the victim's family. Courts move so slow.
There is a full month until xmas and even then mid-Jan is when most of the country returns to work.
Just seems way too long.
(mind you court cases seem way too long to me as well. Always seem to start mid morning, have a morning tea break, have a long lunch etc etc
)
