Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
A MAN accused of murdering three people in Wedderburn believes he was stabbed in the leg with a syringe during a struggle with his first alleged victim, but police found no evidence to support the claim.
Ian Francis Jamieson, 65, intends to plead not guilty to the murder of Greg Holmes, who Jamieson claims injected him with an unknown substance while they fought on the ground.
Jamieson, who previously pleaded guilty to murder, intends on fighting the charge for the stabbing death of Mr Holmes, claiming self defence.
During a hearing in the Supreme Court in Melbourne on Monday, the defence and prosecution discussed in detail the order of events leading to Jamieson attempting to change his guilty pleas to the murders.
On April 1, the prospects of an automatism defence for the murders of Mary and Peter Lockhart was raised in court for the first time – before Jamieson entered his pleas. He believed the alleged injection made him not conscious during the shootings of the elderly couple.
He pleaded not guilty to all three murders on April 4, against his legal advice, and then guilty to all three on April 5.
He has since attempted to change his plea to not guilty to the murder of Greg Holmes.
Jamieson’s former defence counsel John Lavery told the court the accused was convinced he had been stabbed with a syringe during his struggle with Greg Holmes, affecting his state of mind.
“He had described to me in this circumstance where, in the course of the fight with Holmes, Holmes had stuck a syringe into his leg, and injected him with something, and that as a result of that he wasn’t in control of his actions, when he then returned to his house,” Mr Lavery told the court.
In their first conference with Jamieson however, it was mentioned there was no evidence of a syringe.
“(There was) no syringe found by the police, no mention of the syringe in any of the… four interviews that Mr Jamieson had taken part in, and there was discussion about how any such evidence could ever get before a jury,” Mr Lavery said.
The court heard Jamieson’s defence continued to doubt the prospects of success.
Jamieson told the court he entered the guilty pleas because he did not think he would get a fair trial, and his defence told him he had little chance of success.
“They made it perfectly clear to me that I had virtually no hope of winning that case,” Jamieson said.
“I killed a bloke, in self defence.
“I didn’t intend the cause at all, I was defending myself.”
Neuro psychologist Warrick Brewer completed two reports on Jamieson – the first, on March 26, determined his likely cognitive abilities at the time of the murders.
The report stated: “The objective psychometric results do not meet the criteria for mental impairment.”
The second report, on June 5, studied his state of mind during the plea hearings.
Mr Brewer was cross-examined in court on Monday about the second report, as the court continued to determine whether Jamieson would be allowed to change his plea.
Mr Brewer said Jamieson was “suffering poor sleep, feeling let down and confused… under emotional pressure and stress” during the plea hearings.
He said this state of mind could have led to greater impulsiveness, which could have resulted in the changes of plea. Mr Brewer did not speak with Jamieson during the period from April 1 to April 5, however.
The matter was adjourned to July 11.