Sunday, February 15, 2015

Mark Lundy; New Zealand; Murder retrial: Reporter Ross Giblin sums up week one of the trial; murder retrial for - a week in which the defence argued that it was not possible for Lundy to have committed the crime - and "turned the spotlight on the first witness to be called, Christine Lundy's brother Glenn Weggery, by accusing him of the murders."

STORY: "Mark Lundy murder retrial: Week one in review," by reporter Ross Giblin, published by on February 14, 2015.

GIST: "More than 14 years after Christine and Amber Lundy were murdered in their Palmerston North home, husband and father Mark Lundy is again in the dock accused of killing them. A jury of seven men and five women in Wellington have heard the first week of what is expected to be a nine-week trial that has come about because the Privy Council decided that Lundy, now 56, should have a new trial. Was he a devoted husband and doting father, or had he hacked at the heads of his wife and daughter with an unidentified sharp, heavy weapon?......... The Crown alleges the prospect of an insurance payout could have been the motive to kill his wife, and that Amber became a victim when she walked in on the act. But the defence is challenging the supposed financial motive, and the jury is expected to hear more about the businesses in the coming week.........According to Craig and Andrea Lundy, the couple could go three months without having sex. She wasn't a woman her husband could just tap on the shoulder and say, "How about it?" Four times he had used prostitutes, most recently the night his wife and daughter were killed. The woman sent to his motel stayed for almost an hour, and charged $140. By 12.48am she was driving to her next job and, if the Crown is correct, Lundy was probably preparing to return home. But, as his lawyers highlighted in cross-examination of one witness in particular, the allegation that Christine and Amber were murdered in the early hours of August 30 is a radical departure from the scenario at Lundy's first trial in 2002. Then the Crown said he killed them about 7pm, and the clock in the couple's computer had been manipulated to record a human hand shutting down the device at 10.52pm. A now-retired police electronics expert said the recorded shutdown time could not be relied on. He said there was nothing to show the time had been manipulated, but it could have been done without a trace. Opening the defence case to the jury on Monday, one of Lundy's lawyers, Ross Burns, said the retrial was public affirmation that he was wrongly convicted in 2002. Then the jury had been persuaded that he had killed his family about 7pm. That was now acknowledged to be wrong. It was not just computers that could be manipulated, Burns said. Jurors could be too. Twelve people just like them had been sure Christine and Amber died at 7pm, he told the jury. The defence said it was not possible for Lundy to have committed the crime. And it turned the spotlight on the first witness to be called, Christine Lundy's brother Glenn Weggery, by accusing him of the murders. Weggery found the bodies of his sister and niece. He denied killing them, but the defence cross-examined him on circumstances it alleged pointed to him. Some of those circumstances came from scientific evidence, a topic that is expected to be covered in depth later in the trial as the Crown attempts to persuade the jury that smears of Christine's brain were found on Lundy's polo shirt. The defence says the jury cannot be sure the tissue is even human, let alone know that it came from Christine Lundy's skull during the last seconds of her life."

The entire story can be found at:

See also first week recap (day by day):  3 News:


Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.

The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:
Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;