GUILTY UK - Alex Rodda, 15, murdered, Cheshire village, Ashley,13 Dec 2019 *Arrest*

[Legally Bland]

11:05
Police have been searching for Alex's phone this weekend, jury told
We are now turning back to events of December 12.

Mr Mason was asked: “Alex asked if you knew of where you could go for sexual intercourse, and you said you knew this place in the woods?”

”Yes,” Mr Mason said.

He confirmed that Alex would have had a clear understanding of the purpose of going there for sexual intercourse. He also said this had been arranged over Snapchat messages.

The jury has been told that police have looked for Alex’s telephone this weekend in the area Mr Mason admitted to throwing it out of his car on the night of the attack.

It hasn’t been found.

Asked about this, Mr Mason said: “It could have gone into a pond, ponds were quite close to the road, I think.”

“You didn’t want the telephone to ever be found did you?,” Mr Unsworth Qc asked him.

”I was panicked, I didn’t quite understand what to do,” Mr Mason said.

”You did not want it to be found, did you?,” he was asked again.

”No”, he replied.

Asked why, Mr Mason said: “I don’t know, I didn’t want the phone to be found.

“I wasn’t sure what to do at the time. I did decide it was easier to say I didn’t know where the phone was.”

”You didn’t say anything about this in the defence case statement?,” Mr Unsworth asked.

”Because I thought I could try and ignore the fact I had thrown the phone, and like I said before, try and weave my way around it,” Mr Mason said.

”Lie to the jury?,” Mr Unsworth asked.

”Yes,” Mr Mason said.

”On oath?” the defendant was asked.

”Yes,” he said.

“I thought if I admitted to getting rid of the phone it would impact my case negatively, I thought it was best not to say anything about it,” he added.

Asked ‘what about Alex?’ - and whether he thought it might be better if the evidence was found - he said: “No, I didn’t”.

“If you’re right, there maybe evidence that could help you?,” Mr Unsworth asked him.

“There could be things that don’t help me as well, there might be messages between me and Alex,” Mr Mason replies

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Legally Bland]

11:42
Mr Mason says it wasn't his intention to have sex, but to 'discuss the money'
“Was your intention to have sex?,” Mr Unsworth asked Mr Mason.

“No, I wanted to discuss the money,” he replied.

“I thought it was easier to do it face to face. Because it was something that was going on for a long time and I wanted Alex to see I was serious about it.”

Asked how he was going to show he was serious, he said: “I wasn’t sure at the time.

“I got to the woods and decided to take the spanner.

Mr Mason agreed that he could have told Alex this when he first got into his car.

He admitted that he parked away from Alex’s house because he ‘didn’t want to be seen’.

Mr Mason denied giving Alex money for sex.

Asked how Alex seemed when he got in the car, he said: “He just seemed his normal self.”

Asked if there was a discussion about them going for a meal, he said ‘no’.

”Had you said not to tell anyone?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked him.

”I didn’t want people to know,” Mr Mason said.

The jury is now being taken through the timings of from when Mr Mason picked up Alex from his house, to the woodland.

“Why did you ever let him get into the vehicle?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked him.

”I did ask him if he wanted to stay in the car. He said no and that he was worried about cars coming past,” he said.

”If he had stayed in the car, what would you have done?,” he was asked.

Mr Mason replied: ”I would have told him that I didn’t have the money. I would have told him that couldn’t afford to give him any more money and I didn’t have money with me.”

He admitted he could have told Alex about the money over the phone.

”You were utterly misleading him weren’t you?,” Mr Unsworth Qc said.

”Yes,” he replied.

“You deceived him in going to these woods didn’t you?,” he was asked.

”Yes,” Mr Mason answered.

He confirmed that Alex had never previously ‘laid a finger’ on him, and he had never done anything to cause him to be in fear.

Asked why he took the wrench with him, he said: “I thought it would show Alex I was serious about not wanting to pay anymore.

“I thought it would scare him.”

Asked why he hid the wrench up his arm, he said: “I didn’t want Alex to see it, also so I could decide whether or not I wanted to use it or not.

“Also I thought I might not need to use it.”

He went on to confirm that Alex got out of the car before him and ‘into the darkness’.

He said he didn’t leave the lights on in his car, and neither of them used the torches on their phones. He also accepted that his trousers had fallen down when he was pushed over.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Legally Bland]

12:08
Mr Mason speaks about the moment he hit Alex
Mr Unsworth QC is now taking Mr Mason though Alex’s injuries. He has told the jury he hit Alex after Alex had allegedly hit him with the spanner to the forehead.

He is also being taken through the marks found on his face following his arrest.

Mr Mason admitted he didn’t tell the police at the time that he had been the subject of an attack by Alex.

“I thought the best thing to do was not to talk about it,” he said.

Moving back to Alex’s injuries, he said: “I remember hitting Alex to the side of his head, I can’t remember how many, but more than one.”

Asked how Alex reacted after the first hit, he said: “He didn’t fall down after the first blow, he stayed up.

“He wasn’t trying to run away, he could have been trying to maybe dodge out of the way.

“He did try and grab the spanner back.”

Asked how Alex reacted after the second blow, he said: “I can’t quite remember how he reacted. He might have shouted.

“I think he swore at me. He could have told me to ‘f*** off’.”

Mr Mason tells the jury he said nothing during the attack after Mr Unsworth QC suggested the attack was in complete silence. Mr Mason confirms this.

He admitted he had ‘very little injuries’ in comparison to Alex.

He said the wrench fell out of his sleeve after he fell down.

“How could Alex get to it and you couldn’t?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked him.

”I was still on the floor,” Mr Mason replied.

It was suggested that the marks were defence marks Alex inflected.

Mr Mason said: “There were injuries on both sides. He may have put his arm up, but he didn’t reach out with his heads”.

He said he did not hold Alex down during the attack. Mr Mason told the jury he wasn’t sure how the marks got on Alex’s neck, but said he didn’t strangle him.

12:08
Short break
The court is taking a short break.


Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Legally Bland]

12:22
Trial resumes
Jurors are back in court and the hearing is set to resume.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Legally Bland]

12:38
Mr Mason admits attack was 'excessive'
Asked about the wounds to the back of Alex’s head, which had previously been described by the pathologist as ‘violent and repetitive’, Mr Mason said: “This happened when Alex was on the floor, I think he was unconscious. He wasn’t moving. He wasn’t saying anything.”

He admitted striking Alex a number of times to the back of the head.

He confirmed that Alex posed no threat to him at this point.

”Why were you striking him?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked.

”I don’t know,” Mr Mason said.

”Did you want him dead?” he was asked.

“No,” he replied.

”What did you want?” he was asked.

”The money to stop,” Mr Mason said.

He admitted that Alex’s trousers had fallen down when he moved his body.

He said: “I knew he wanted to start with oral sex, but I stopped him.”

He confirmed that despite being in ‘complete darkness’, Alex was able to find the wrench before he did.

“This was a cowardly attack on Alex, wasn’t it?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked him.

”No, Alex hit me first,” Mr Mason said.

”But it was cowardly wasn’t it?” he was asked.

“Yes, it was over excessive,” he replied.

Asked why, he said: “Because I killed him.”

He confirmed it was ‘out of proportion’ with what Alex had allegedly done to him.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Legally Bland]

12:53
'It was my breaking point'
Mr Mason confirmed he had blood ‘all over him’, following the attack.

Asked about why his trousers were down, he said: “Alex had undone them at the start.

“My trousers were down and undone, a couple of inches, but I quite often wear my trousers quite low.”

Asked what the last thing Alex said to him was, Mr Mason said: “I think it was when he told me to off”.

When it was suggested he could have stopped at that point, he said ‘yes’.

“Your purpose was to let him know you were serious, but there you were gripping that wrench, he had no weapon, and you could have scared him with it?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked the defendant. “Yes,” he replied.

”Why didn’t you?,” he is asked.

The accused replied: ”Because Alex had hit me, I got hold of the spanner and I hit him the first time. It was my breaking point.”

Asked what he did in the 20 minutes before leaving the scene, he said: “I went back to my car to get my cigarettes and lighter and then I returned to Alex.

”What state was he in?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked him.

”He wasn’t conscious. He wasn’t speaking but he was breathing,” Mr Mason said.

Asked what he said to Alex, he said: “Nothing.”

Asked why, he said: “I hadn’t thought to.”

”As he lay beneath you, you started having a cigarette, did you?,” Mr Unsworth QC asked.

”Yes,” he replied.

Mr Mason told the jury he thought about getting help and confirmed he was the one person who knew Alex was ‘in this state’.

Mr Mason said: “At that point I was scared of getting into trouble myself.”

13:02
Mr Unsworth Qc is now asking Mr Mason about the events after he left the scene.

“What did you think would happen?,” he asked.

”I thought he may survive. I thought he could have moved a little, bit but not a massive amount. He could have dragged himself,” he said.

13:02
Lunch break
Jurors will return in around an hour.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Parker Knoll]

This freak deserves all he is going to get.

 

[Legally Bland]

14:19
Trial set to resume
The jury is back in court and the hearing is set to get underway.

14:43
'I'd had enough of everything'
Mr Mason confirmed that he was at breaking point, and, when asked what he meant by that, he told the jury: “I’d had enough of everything.”

“It had been known that five days before, you were going to have sex with Alex. He hadn’t threatened to put any images of you online between December 7 and December 12, did he?,” Mr Unsworth asked him.

”No,” Mr Mason said.

”He hadn’t threatened to show your friends or family that you had been having sex, had he?,” he was asked.

”No,” he said.

Mr Mason confirmed that December 12 was the first opportunity he had to be with Alex since they last met for sex.

“You were not at breaking point, were you?,” Mr Unsworth asked him.

”Yes, I was,” the defendant said.

Asked by the prosecutor why he went to the pub afterwards, he said: “I wanted to do the most normal thing.

It’s previously been said that Mr Mason told his friends that he had a nosebleed prior to arriving at the pub.

Asked about this, he said: “I did have a small nosebleed, yes. It just started.

“Between Moss Lane and me getting to Hulse Farm.

It was put to Mr Mason that the selfie he sent while inside the Red Lion pub wasn’t an accident.

He said: “It wasn’t meant to go to that group, it was meant for Caitlyn.”

“Why did you move onto the second public house?,” Mr Unsworth Qc asked him.

”I received a message from some of the other Young Farmers to say they were there,” he said.

Mr Mason told the jury he had around two-and-a-half to three pints of Guinness.

Asked what caused him to leave the pub, he said: “Everyone else left, I decided to go too.”

He confirmed that he got home at around 9.47pm and spoke briefly to his parents.

He said he told them he had been to the pub, but didn’t say anything about the incident involving Alex.

It was also put to him about the selfie he sent to Caitlyn that evening over Snapchat, which was said to show him with his top off and saying ‘goodnight’.

”Were you intending to go to sleep?,” Mr Unsworth asked him.

“I tried but I couldn’t sleep. I didn’t have a shower.”

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[Legally Bland]

15:09AMY WALKER
Defendant offered to help in search for Alex before returning to his body
Mr Mason is now being asked about the messages he sent to Alex's friends in their search for him.

"You said: 'is everything ok', why did you say that?" Mr Unsworth QC asked him.

"I was trying to be calm." Mr Mason said.

When asked how he felt about this, he said: "I was panicking that people were worrying about him."

He confirmed that he offered to go round to Alex's mum's house and talk with her, and that he offered to help in the search for Alex.

When asked what he would have done if Lisa Rodda had taken him up on that offer, he said: "I would most likely not have gone because of what I had done."

"Were you trying to front it out?" Mr Unsworth asked him.

"Yes I was at that time," Mr Mason said.

When asked how he felt about receiving the text message from Cheshire Police, he said: "I was worried that they would know and I was going to be arrested."

It was said that Mr Mason drove back to the woods after receiving this message.

"You were trying to remove the body, weren't you?" Mr Unsworth asked him.

"No, I thought it would be easier for him to be found." Mr Mason said.

When asked why he left Alex in a partially dressed state, he said: "I panicked."

"You didn't ensure the dignity of him being dressed, did you?" Mr Unsworth said.

"No, I didn't," Mr Mason said.

When asked if it was obvious Alex had died, he said yes. When asked why he spent an hour with Alex's body, he said: "Because I kept moving him in little bits, and was questioning whether to carry on moving him or whether I should ring anyone. I was having a cigarette as well."

When asked about the finding of Alex's jacket and Mr Mason's bloodied clothing in bin bags in the car, he said: "I decided to put Alex's jacket and my fleece in the bin bags, I thought it was the best thing to do at the time."

15:16AMY WALKER
Defendant admits causing 15 injuries to Alex Rodda's head, leaving him for dead and telling 'lie after lie' to friends in aftermath
In the final questions from Mr Unsworth, Mr Mason was asked: "You didn't want Alex telling anyone of you having sex with him?"

He replied: "I didn't want him to tell anyone, no."

"You chose the location of where he would go on the final night of his life?"

"Yes, I did choose the location."

"You drove him to that location?"

"Yes."

"You had that wrench with you, didn't you?"

"Yes I did."

"You caused a total of 15 injuries to his head?"

"Yes I did."

"You carried out a violent and repetitive attack on his head, didn't you?"

"Yes."

"You caused two further blows to his body?"

"Yes."

"You left him for dead, didn't you?"

"Yes."

"You disposed of his telephone?"

"Yes."

"You appeared in two public houses in the hours that followed, didn't you?"

"Yes."

"You told lie after lie to your friends?"

"Yes."

"You gave false information about where he was, didn't you?"

"Yes."

"You chose to speak to the police when you wanted to, didn't you?"

"Yes."

"You didn't speak to them, did you?"

"That's correct."

In brief re-examination, Mr Mason's defence barrister Mr Gordon Cole QC asked him: "Have you been weaving a story?"

"No," Mr Mason said

"Have you been telling the truth or a lie?"

"Truth."

The defence case has now concluded - and that's it for the evidence in the case.

The jury has been sent home.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Has it been said what the other selfie was?

I'm guessing the prosecution is suggesting he was heartless, carrying on as normal in the pub and so on.

 

[Parker Knoll]

I would think he was just laying a paper trail by sending photos from various locations. This guy is a bloody idiot. He’s going down for a very long time.

 

[Legally Bland]

Has it been said what the other selfie was?

I'm guessing the prosecution is suggesting he was heartless, carrying on as normal in the pub and so on.

This is all that has been said about the selfie:

The defendant was said to have taken a selfie picture inside the pub and posted it on a group chat on Snapchat. The prosecutor said this suggested the defendant was ‘laying the ground’ for a potential alibi.” He could say that he was with friends that evening at a time when Alexander Rodda went missing,” said the QC [from prosecution opening].

...

At 19.14, Mr Mason takes his phone out.

His friend then receives a Snapchat message from Mr Mason, which is described as a ‘selfie; taken inside the pub at the table, the jury is told.

This image is sent to a Whatsapp group. The image appears to be a screenshot from Snapchat.

...

He [a friend of MM] confirmed that Mr Mason had taken a selfie on Snapchat and posted it in a Snapchat group the friends shared.

...

In cross examination, he [another friend of MM] told the jury the Snapchat selfie Mr Mason had taken was a mistake and ‘he wasn’t supposed to send it’.

...

He [MM] also said the selfie he had taken and sent to his friends was ‘an accident’.

...

It was put to Mr Mason that the selfie he sent while inside the Red Lion pub wasn’t an accident.

He said: “It wasn’t meant to go to that group, it was meant for Caitlyn.”

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court



I think my favourite lie so far was MM claiming hew was going to commit suicide by falling down some stairs:

He told the jury of an occasion when Mr Mason had Googled ‘what happens if you kick someone down the stairs’, ‘everyday poison’, and ‘things that are poisonous’.

Mr Mason said: “I searched what would happen if you fell down the stairs and that was one of the links that came up. This was when I was feeling very depressed at the time, when I was feeling suicidal. I think I was looking at ways to kill myself.”

 

[HongKongPhooey]

This is all that has been said about the selfie:

The defendant was said to have taken a selfie picture inside the pub and posted it on a group chat on Snapchat. The prosecutor said this suggested the defendant was ‘laying the ground’ for a potential alibi.” He could say that he was with friends that evening at a time when Alexander Rodda went missing,” said the QC [from prosecution opening].

...

At 19.14, Mr Mason takes his phone out.

His friend then receives a Snapchat message from Mr Mason, which is described as a ‘selfie; taken inside the pub at the table, the jury is told.

This image is sent to a Whatsapp group. The image appears to be a screenshot from Snapchat.

...

He [a friend of MM] confirmed that Mr Mason had taken a selfie on Snapchat and posted it in a Snapchat group the friends shared.

...

In cross examination, he [another friend of MM] told the jury the Snapchat selfie Mr Mason had taken was a mistake and ‘he wasn’t supposed to send it’.

...

He [MM] also said the selfie he had taken and sent to his friends was ‘an accident’.

...

It was put to Mr Mason that the selfie he sent while inside the Red Lion pub wasn’t an accident.

He said: “It wasn’t meant to go to that group, it was meant for Caitlyn.”

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court



I think my favourite lie so far was MM claiming hew was going to commit suicide by falling down some stairs:

He told the jury of an occasion when Mr Mason had Googled ‘what happens if you kick someone down the stairs’, ‘everyday poison’, and ‘things that are poisonous’.

Mr Mason said: “I searched what would happen if you fell down the stairs and that was one of the links that came up. This was when I was feeling very depressed at the time, when I was feeling suicidal. I think I was looking at ways to kill myself.”

It really is bizarre how he's "defending" himself.

Thanks re the selfie, I missed that part previously.

 

[Parker Knoll]

I’m amazed by his performance in the witness box tbh. He’s sealed his own miserable fate that’s for sure.

 

[Legally Bland]

Chester Crown Court 2 T20197357
Matthew William Mason
Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 10:08
Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:30 - 11:13

https://www.thelawpages.com/court-hearings-lists/Chester-Crown-Court.php

 

[Legally Bland]

14:36
Jury back in court
The trial is set to resume.

15:06
Judge addresses jury - 'it’s not emotions you try this case on, but it’s on the evidence'
Judge Steven Everett is addressing the jury:

There are three directions of law I will give you.

The first one relates to a respected function of a judge and a jury.

During this case you have experienced, you and I have different parts to pay in this trial.

I am responsible for legal matters and will give directions you must accept and apply what I tell you about the law.

You are responsible for weighing up the evidence and deciding on the facts of the case.

Some points of this case are disputed. You may think a lot of the prosecution evidence is not in dispute.

On the other hand, some of the evidence is disputed.

Cases like this can give rise to sympathy and emotion. I remind you what I said at the start of this case - it’s not emotions you try this case on, but it’s on the evidence.

15:07
The standard of proof
The judge continues:

Secondly - the burden and standard of proof.

The prosecution must prove the defendant is guilty. It is not for the defendant to prove his innocence.

The prosecution only succeeds in proving his guilt if you are made sure of his guilt.

If, after considering the evidence, you are sure he is guilty, your verdict must be guilty.

If you are not sure, you must say not guilty.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court as hearing resumes

 

[Legally Bland]

15:21
'There is a significant difference between the prosecution and defence'
Jurors are told:

Thirdly, the definition of the offence of murder, the definition of self-control and the consideration of an alternative verdict of guilty of manslaughter due to loss of control.

In this case it is not an issue that on the evening of December 12, 2019, the defendant Matthew Mason drove 15-year-old Alex Rodda to a quiet country lane near to the M56 motorway.

Whilst the two were together, Alex Rodda received many blows to his head and some blows to his body inflicted by a large wrench which fatally injured him.

It’s no issue that it was the defendant that inflicted these blows. It is not an issue that the defendant was involved in a sexual relationship with Alex in the weeks or months up to the events of the attack.

Whatever conclusion you reach about the sexual acts, this is not a principal issue. Your task is to decide what happened when Matthew Mason attacked Alex Rodda.

There is a significant difference between the prosecution and defence.

On behalf of the prosecution, it’s alleged the fatal attack was pre-planned.

It’s alleged he participated in an unlawful sexual relationship with Alex Rodda that gave rise to demands for money from Alex, that he would disclose the details of the sexual relationship if he did not send him money.

It is the prosecution’s case that the defendant decided he would put an end to this blackmail by disposing of Alex.

It’s not an issue that over that period that the defendant transferred more than £2,000 to Alex Rodda.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Latest updates from court as hearing resumes

 

[Legally Bland]

15:42
'The prosecution alleged that the defendant thought he would never be caught'
The judge adds:

Evidence suggests Matthew Mason was struggling financially as a result.

It’s the prosecution’s case that because of this he made the decision to kill Alex having carried out the relevant research before arranging a meeting with Alex on the evening of December 12.

The prosecution allege he drove with him in his car and had a heavy wrench, and he used this as a weapon when he repeatedly struck him to the head, causing fatal injuries.

The prosecution asserts this was a premeditated and unlawful attack with the defendant intending to kill his victim, resulting in Alex Rodda’s death.

The prosecution alleged that the defendant thought he would never be caught and had intended to dispose of Alex’s body, but he was unable to do so as he was simply too heavy.

15:45
'His case is that he panicked'
The judge tells the jury:

On behalf of the defendant, it’s not an issue he had been involved in sexual activity with Alex Rodda knowing it was wrong to do so.

It’s his case that Alex Rodda took advantage of this and started to blackmail him.

It’s his case that he hoped to persuade Alex to stop making these demands on the early evening of December 12.

He wanted to discuss this when he had been giving Alex a lift in the car to Holmes Chapel to drop him off to meet his friends and go to Manchester shopping.

It’s his case in the days and minutes prior, whilst driving with Alex, Alex asked him if he wanted to have sexual contact and that’s why they were going out to the woods.

Matthew Mason told you when he parked his car he got the wrench to the woods with him because he felt intimidated by Alex and intended to threaten him and ask Alex to stop making these demands.

His case is that Alex became abusive and violent and during the struggle, Alex hit him before the defendant hit him back and he hit Alex a number of times in self defence.

He couldn’t recall how many times he hit him, but accepts he did so which resulted in the fatal injuries.

His case is that he panicked after that and his actions after this were influenced by panic.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Read back through every bit of evidence

 

[Legally Bland]

16:09
Judge continues to address jury
Judge Everett continues:

The prosecution must prove that the defendant deliberately and unlawfully caused the death of another person and that at the time of doing so, he either a) intended to kill that other person, or b) intended to cause him serious grievous bodily harm.

You must be sure it was the defendant and no one else who deliberately and repeatedly struck Alex Rodda to death with the wrench. There is no issue in this regard.

The defendant admits he did this.

You must also be sure the defendant acted unlawfully when he did this.

It is the defence case that he acted in self defence.

It is for the prosecution to make you sure the defendant is guilty and not acting in self defence.

A defence of self defence is really just common sense.

If someone lands blows, if he is attacked or maybe about to be attacked, he is entitled to defend himself.

But, however, even if you were satisfied that the defendant is or might be acting in self defence, you also have to decide whether the type or amount of force used was reasonable.

You have to consider how to approach the issue, consider if the intention was to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm.

If you are sure self defence does not apply, you must then go on to consider the defendant’s intention at the time of the repeated striking on Alex Rodda.

In that regard, the prosecution must prove when the defendant did this.

Either firstly intending to kill Alex Rodda or secondly intended to cause really serious injury.

It is also the prosecution’s case that this was premeditated.

The prosecution does not have to prove any premediation of length - heat of the moment can be sufficient.

If, after considering all matters, you are not sure if the attack was deliberate - and if you are not sure he acted in self defence - you must find him not guilty.

16:14
Judge moves on to loss of control direction
The judge adds:

In certain circumstances, a person changed with murder may not be guilty of murder and instead be guilty of manslaughter.

Did Matthew Mason kill Alex Rodda as a result of a loss of control?

Loss of control is defined as an inability to maintain your actions in accordance with a considered, justified and normal reasonability.

You must consider all of the evidence, the injuries and the force of the blows needed to inflict the injuries.

If you decide Matthew Mason did lose self control, you must go on to consider what triggered it.

If you are sure of any loss of self control, you must consider if it was triggered by things said or done, or if this person addicted justifiably after a sense of being seriously wronged; or whether a person of Matthew Mason’s gender or age with a normal degree of thinking would have reacted in the same way.

In these circumstances, the partial defence of loss of self control does not apply.

It’s Matthew Mason’s case that he did lose self control and repeatedly struck Alex on December 12.

It’s his case that this was triggered by things said or done, or a combination of everything, that resulted in Alex Rodda’s death.

It’s an assertion by the defendant that Alex had been aggressive and struck him with the wrench.

It’s Matthew Mason’s case he had a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged because of the blackmail, even though the concern about the money had come about after the defendant committed sexual offences to Alex Rodda.

In his evidence, he accepted Alex Rodda had done nothing to deserve the actions, but it is also the prosecution’s case the defendant planned the attack and the way it occurred.

It’s the prosecution’s case that the defendant deliberately left Alex Rodda to die in the woods and took Alex Rodda’s phone to ensure Alex wouldn’t ask for help.

If you are sure of the partial defence does not apply, you must find him not guilty.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Read back through every bit of evidence

 

[Legally Bland]

16:15
'Give this case no thought at all over the break'
The judge tells jurors: “Give this case no thought at all over the break.

“I hope you all have a happy and peaceful Christmas.

“See you in the New Year.”

16:16
Trial adjourned
Jurors will return on January 4.

Alex Rodda murder trial: Read back through every bit of evidence