In a final address to the Supreme Court, the Crown has argued forensic evidence and the testimony of witnesses prove Long Gully woman Kate Stone is guilty of killing her partner Darren Reid.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Ms Stone, 41, has pleaded not guilty to the murder of 45-year-old Mr Reid, who was set alight at the couple’s home in December 2016.
Prosecutor Melissa Mahady first ran the jury through Ms Stone’s version of events of that night.
Read more:
- Day 1: Murder trial begins for woman accused of setting partner alight
- Day 2: Murdered Bendigo man in fear for his life, mother tells court
- Day 3: Couple heard yelling in hours before fatal Long Gully fire
- Day 4: Murdered man told paramedic he did not know attacker, court hears
- Day 5: Daughter says three men set father on fire in Long Gully
- Day 6: Murder accused told police men were to blame for death
- Day 7: Man denies talking ‘revenge’ after confrontation with murdered man
- Day 8: Man not in area night of fatal Long Gully attack, court hears
- Day 9: Neighbours heard death threats before murder, court hears
- Day 10: Man tells court he was home the night of Darren Reid’s murder
- Day 11: Long Gully murder accused said she 'did it', neighbour tells court
- Day 12: Long Gully murder trial hears DNA evidence
- Day 13: Fire expert gives evidence to Long Gully murder trial
- Day 14: Murder accused’s police interview played in court
She said Ms Stone first told a firefighter three people threw something on Mr Reid and set him alight, then later told a police officer a Jason Baxter tried to break into the home and set him on fire.
Ms Mahady said Ms Stone told another police officer it was Jason Baxter and two other men, who came to her house three weeks prior. Mr Reid’s sister gave evidence Ms Stone told her a man called ‘Braxton’ was responsible.
Ms Mahady said Ms Stone told a detective three men – Mr Baxter, a man called ‘Gibbo’, and another – were present when she and Mr Reid were doused in petrol from a can from their shed, before Mr Reid was set alight.
The prosecutor referred to a forensic physician’s evidence that Ms Stone said to him she embraced a person on fire.
She spoke of Ms Stone’s statement, in which the accused woman said she and Mr Reid went outside and found Mr Baxter and ‘Gibbo’ standing by the shed.
“She’s very specific Mr Baxter had the lid in one hand and the can in the other,” Ms Mahady said. Ms Stone claimed Mr Baxter splashed them both with petrol before setting her partner alight.
The prosecutor took the jury to Ms Stone’s police interview, during which she said the backyard was brightly lit by a spotlight. Ms Mahady asked the jury to consider what the lighting was like in CCTV footage from the night.
Ms Mahady told the jury an earlier ‘splash park incident’ was the seed for Ms Stone’s version of events, which she said was inconsistent with the evidence.
“How did she so quickly come up with a version on that night? It all leads back to the splash park incident,” she said.
Ms Stone gave a number of accounts of this incident, Ms Mahady said, in which there was a confrontation at her home.
Ms Mahady said the accounts given by the four men involved or allegedly involved in this incident showed some consistencies with Ms Stone’s, referring to the evidence of Benjamin Thatcher, who admitted he went to Ms Stone’s home that day because of an earlier incident at the splash park.
But she said the four men were ruled out “pretty early on” in the investigation.
The jury was taken to a police officer’s evidence, when she told the court Ms Stone and Mr Reid’s daughter first told her she heard banging and was told to go to her room, then later said it was Mr Baxter after her mother said the same.
Ms Mahady drew the jury’s attention to evidence the prosecution said showed the state of the couple’s relationship.
She spoke of Mr Reid’s mother, who told the jury she received a phone call from her son in early November 2016 during which he said he was “in fear of (his) life” after Ms Stone chased him down the street with a carving knife.
Ms Mahady also referred to his stepmother, who said Mr Reid told her he was going to leave Ms Stone, his stepsister, who said Mr Reid was scared something was going to happen, and a neighbour, who also said Mr Reid told her he planned on leaving.
The prosecutor said there was also the evidence of four neighbours and Mr Reid’s nephew, who all said they heard arguing in the lead-up to the fatal incident on December 18, 2016.
Ms Mahady said the accused woman claimed three men walked into the backyard through the open gate that night, but firefighters said the gate was closed and the padbolts down.
Next-door neighbours gave evidence to the court an enamel thinner can discovered in their backyard on December 19 was not there the previous day.
Ms Mahady said Ms Stone said she had never seen the can, but forensic analysis showed “very strong support” for the proposition her DNA was on the handle and another area.
The prosecutor spoke of a fire expert’s evidence that the fire started on or around the verandah. The expert told the court the accelerant was a toluene-xylene mixture, and there was no petrol found.
He said this mixture was in the enamel thinner can and on clothing taken from the bath, but no traces were found on Ms Stone’s clothing, nor on the clothing of the men she had named as responsible.
The expert also told the court it would be extremely unlikely a person could embrace a person on fire.
But if they could, the court heard, they would suffer “terrible, terrible” injuries.
A person with fuel on themselves, the expert said, would suffer similar injuries to a person on fire if they were standing beside them.
Ms Mahady said Mr Reid suffered injuries to 85 per cent of his body, as well as his upper airways.
The prosecution’s address continues today.
Before Ms Mahady began her final address, the jury was presented with the last of the evidence.
The jury saw CCTV footage from Bendigo hospital, which showed Mr Reid arriving by ambulance shortly before midnight on December 18, 2016, as well as Ms Stone and two daughters.
Defence counsel Peter Kilduff cross-examined Homicide Squad Detective Senior Constable Michael Cashman.
Mr Kilduff asked Detective Senior Constable Cashman if he had made enquiries about phone boxes in the area, regarding Mr Reid’s phone call to his mother.
He said he had not, and he would not dispute Mr Kilduff’s suggestion there were none close to the couple’s home.
Detective Senior Constable Cashman also said there were no fingerprint results from testing of the enamel thinner can.
He said he would not dispute Mr Kilduff’s assertion that the conviction record of Mr Baxter’s son indicated he had not attended court on December 19, 2016.
The trial continues.