Found Deceased NEW ZEALAND - Grace Millane, 22, British backpacker, Auckland, 1 Dec 2018 *Arrest* #2

[CoverMeCagney]

Let's just remember that whatever Grace consented to that night he strangled her until she died. That is not a 30 second job, that is 3, 4, 5 minutes of continuous hold, pinned down. She would have been panicking and trying to stop him, and he did not stop. He must have seen she was not enjoying it, he must have noticed she was unconscious, and he did nothing about it for hours. On the contrary, the depraved bastard took photos of her body and watched porn. There is no excuse for what he did, none.

 

[Kikixxxx]

I find it weird / suspicious how he doesn’t go into much or any detail about the part where she actually dies. All I can find in the interviews He says “ we finished and I went to shower cause I was sweaty” is about as much detail he goes in... it’s possible he’s spoken more in depth about this though and the media haven’t reported it I guess.

 

[Mariposa]

Even if Grace did want to be choked that night as some kind of sexual kink it doesn’t explain away how he would of had to have choked her for awhile before she would of passed out , turned blue and died.


So at some point he would of noticed the signs and stopped. But he didn’t so that’s on him and that makes him solely responsible here.

IMO

Thank you. I’ve said before EVEN IF Grace was on tape saying “Strangle me to death please” the man is still criminally culpable. FYI; you can’t kill someone else even if they ask you to and escape criminal responsibility if you are caught.

That’s why I think his best hope is that somehow the defense forensic pathologist cast reasonable doubt over the mechanics of the strangulation and was the accused RECKLESS or not in placing the amount and duration of pressure on the neck needed to cause death? A reasonable person knows that choking someone too hard and/or too long is likely injurious. The burden is on the strangler to stop their action if they want to avoid criminal responsibility for a death— not on the strangled.

 

[Edinlass]

Let's just remember that whatever Grace consented to that night he strangled her until she died. That is not a 30 second job, that is 3, 4, 5 minutes of continuous hold, pinned down. She would have been panicking and trying to stop him, and he did not stop. He must have seen she was not enjoying it, he must have noticed she was unconscious, and he did nothing about it for hours. On the contrary, the depraved bastard took photos of her body and watched porn. There is no excuse for what he did, none.

Well said.

 

[Hjp]

Catching up , it’s a lot to take in . If ever there was a case of hindsight that chap should be having it now .... just phoned an ambulance that night if not guilty and it was an accident.

The thing is, if he had done the right thing and called an ambulance when he realised she had passed on him, he would still have been down for manslaughter anyway because she died on his hands, in his hotel room, and he definately knew that.

The difference I suspect now is:- had he originally conducted himself better and told a truthful account straight away with a guilty plea on manslaughter:- I think that his sentence would have discounted to a much greater extent to what he will likely receive now in any scenario.

He is definitely going to prison and he knows he is. This is more now about damage limitation and getting as short a sentence he can. His attempts to cover up his "dirty work" has been a major mistake on his part and he will pay a big price for that.

 

[CrazyLilBlondie]

He must have seen she was not enjoying it

If he's an avid user of Pornhub then I doubt that would affect him! Most of the videos of that kind I've seen on there they don't look they are enjoying it much either so he probably thinks thats normal in his head.

 

[Mariposa]

If he's an avid user of Pornhub then I doubt that would affect him! Most of the videos of that kind I've seen on there they don't look they are enjoying it much either so he probably thinks thats normal in his head.

Also the excuses the “Love Island” explaining sex expert professor witness had yesterday for a person not doing choking in a safe manner— too sexually aroused or too drunk or drugged—aren’t going to cut the mustard here from a legal standpoint.

I’m very interested in hearing about the judge’s words to the jury on Friday because I’m hazy on elements of manslaughter vs murder in NZ law.

 

[DanceCard]

A quick good morning to our NZers, if my calculation is right you're all waking up just about now!

 

[sunnynz]

I still want to know what the fact was that the judge said at the very beginning on the case that was out there that was completely false...!

I do too! I’d forgotten about that. I can’t think what it could be.

 

[JG123]

Because typically in rape trials, this kind of evidence is not allowed.

But because Grace was murdered, somehow shaming evidence is being introduced

This witness has zero probative value. The defence called him only because Grace had a one night stand. He specifically did not engage in any strangulation sex with her.

But it isn't a rape case, it's a murder case, and based on how this type of evidence has been brought up and elaborated on at length, I'm assuming it is allowed in a murder case?

The defence is completely based on proving that she was willing to engage in choking and that it was an accident on the defendant's part. Her sexual past and what she's into sexually is their evidence that she was indeed willing to engage in "kinky" acts such as choking.

They asked the one night stand if he engaged in any choking with her and he said no, I'm guessing they were hoping/assuming he'd say yes? Regardless,
like I said before, they will do anything and everything for their defendant to win, I'm just not sure why people are shocked by this and think certain things should be out of bounds morally when they're not legally. They're lawyers, when have they ever been known for their ethics?

 

[Hjp]

But it isn't a rape case, it's a murder case, and based on how this type of evidence has been brought up and elaborated on at length, I'm assuming it is allowed in a murder case?

The defence is completely based on proving that she was willing to engage in choking and that it was an accident on the defendant's part. Her sexual past and what she's into sexually is their evidence that she was indeed willing to engage in "kinky" acts such as choking.

They asked the one night stand if he engaged in any choking with her and he said no, I'm guessing they were hoping/assuming he'd say yes? Regardless,
like I said before, they will do anything and everything for their defendant to win, I'm just not sure why people are shocked by this.

Without conclusive proof of murder, the fallback position will have to be criminally negligent manslaughter, (or a similar NZ definition).

In NZ, and as far as I'm aware, sentences of such sort are highly fact dependent and can stretch from a large range up to life in prisonment, (although the maximum severity is rare, and is usually only attracted to the career criminals with an extensive previous criminal record or on licence / parole).

I am afraid that if the trial goes down this road I can only see him being done for 12 years or maybe 8 with parole. Out before he is 40. I am hoping that what he did after her death will land him with a much stiffer sentence than that.

I still think he did murder Grace, but without solid proof from Grace's body or his flat we haven't got a leg to stand on. I will be watching the next few days events very closely with you all indeed.

....Almost a year now since Grace's death too. A needless death that should never have happened.

 

[Tortoise]

I find it weird / suspicious how he doesn’t go into much or any detail about the part where she actually dies. All I can find in the interviews He says “ we finished and I went to shower cause I was sweaty” is about as much detail he goes in... it’s possible he’s spoken more in depth about this though and the media haven’t reported it I guess.

No, that's it.


The defendant, said Mr McCoubrey, had given no explanation for how Miss Millane died.

Grace Millane 'killed during rough sex with Tinder date', New Zealand court hears | Daily Mail Online

 

[JG123]

I still think he did murder Grace, but without solid proof from Grace's body or his flat we haven't got a leg to stand on. I will be watching the next few days events very closely with you all indeed.

I think he did too. One thing that's confused me and I think may confuse the jury is that there are differing pathology reports.

One says that it would take a person four to five minutes to die from the injuries she suffered, the other said that he didn't find anything out of the ordinary:

Stables said he could conclusively state that Millane died from manual pressure applied to her neck “for long enough and with enough force for that bruising to occur”.

There was “extensive evidence” of bruising on the left side of Millane’s neck, in what Stables described as a “significant injury”.

“This bruising wouldn’t occur with gentle pressure on the neck … it takes quite a bit of effort.”

Stables said it would typically take a person four to five minutes to die from the injuries Millane suffered.

Florida-based pathologist Dr Fintan Garavan appeared via audio-visual link in Auckland High Court and said there was “no evidence to injuries of deeper haemorrhaging” in Ms Millane’s death, Nine Media’s Stuff website reported.

Radio NZ quoted the doctor as saying a bruise found on Ms Millane’s neck was not located in deep tissue, which along with further bruising on her chest and arms showed the injuries were the result of consensual activity.

“In my expert opinion, if a non-consensual act has taken place the victim is under attack or resisting attack, they struggle.

“It’s that action, the struggle or struggling, between an aggressor and a recipient, that gives rise to such injuries.”

Crown prosecutor Brian Dickey challenged Dr Garavan about whether the pathology report could show the presence or absence of consent, to which Radio NZ said the doctor replied that the absence of other injuries had given him reason to pause.

So which is it? I guess most people would lean on the prosecution's version because the defence haven't really provided an explanation from what I've read. Have they stated at any time that it's possible to die from choking that's less than the time the prosecution stated?

One other question I have that I hope someone better informed than I can answer - can his actions afterwards be legally taken into consideration when deciding the verdict?

 

[Mariposa]

Onr other question I have that I hope someone better informed than I can answer - can his actions afterwards be legally taken into consideration when deciding the verdict?

Absolutely. All that evidence CCTV etc of the defendant’s actions post-death would not have been allowed into the trial if the jury can’t consider it.

 

[Tortoise]

9:30am - A large crowd is gathering for what is likely to be the last day the court sits for a full session during this trial. The Crown will be the first to present a closing summary - likely led by Brian Dickey - before the defence's Ian Brookie speaks to the jury.

Grace Millane murder trial: Live updates as Crown, defence present closing statements

 

[nesspi]

I do too! I’d forgotten about that. I can’t think what it could be.

Possibly that her body has been dismembered to put in the suitcase? That "fact" seemed to be disseminated quite widely to explain the volume of blood in the room

 

[LucyRocket]

10:13am - Justice Simon Moore has given consent to defence lawyer Ian Brookie to reopen the defence case and read an agreed fact to the jury.

Brookie reads out a clarification from pathologist Dr Fintan Garavan. In it, the pathologist says it is possible death could occur after up to 10 minutes of manual strangulation. This time period would be from consciousness to death.

Grace Millane murder trial: Live updates as Crown, defence present closing statements

 

[Tortoise]

3 minutes ago
Crown solicitor Brian Dickey begins his closing submissions on behalf of the Crown.

"The Crown doesn't have to prove the defendant intended to kill Grace Millane," he begins.

"I want to make a few points clear at the outset in the hope they might carry through with you. There is more than one method by which a verdict of murder may be returned."

"You may form the view that he didn't intend to kill Grace - and i'll be asking you to consider that very seriously - but in the end, the Crown only has to prove [beyond a reasonable doubt] "reckless intent".

"That is that the defendant knew he was causing harm that might cause death, he was aware of that risk, and he took it, and as a result of taking that risk, death occurred.

"That is reckless intent, conscious risk taking. You can kill someone by conscious risk taking and in this country that is murder," he tells the jury.

"So when I speak of the recklessness of the defendant, if you are satisfied you knew he was doing something that may be likely to cause harm, he appreciated that risk and took it - then he is guilty of murder."

Grace Millane murder trial: Crown and defence to sum up the case

 

[Tortoise]

10:23am - Dickey says one of the two pathologists who gave evidence said that it could take up to 10 minutes of manual strangulation to cause death. During that time, the victim would go unconscious.

After unconsciousness, "you would have to carry on to cause death," Dickey tells the jury.


The prosecutor says the accused had the Millane under his grip, suffocating her, for between five and 10 minutes.

He tells the jury that this is reckless murder.

"This is not sex play… this is not restricted breath play".

10:21am - Crown prosecutor Brian Dickey has begun his closing statement. He begins by noting that the Crown does not have to prove the accused intended to kill Millane. He echoes comments from Justice Moore earlier this week that murder can be committed by someone with intent to kill or by someone causing death through reckless actions. He suggests the accused's actions were reckless.

Grace Millane murder trial: Live updates as Crown, defence present closing statements

 

[JG123]

Brookie reads out a clarification from pathologist Dr Fintan Garavan. In it, the pathologist says it is possible death could occur after up to 10 minutes of manual strangulation. This time period would be from consciousness to death.

Woah, that was exactly the point I made a couple of hours ago. So now both the defence and the prosecution are agreed on the key point of the case.