'Loving relationship': Defence denies DeLuney fell out with mother
DeLuney is on trial at the High Court in Wellington charged with murdering the 79-year-old at her Khandallah home in January 2024, which she denies.
The Crown finished its closing argument on Friday, arguing DeLuney had been stealing cash from her mother and then violently attacked her, leaving her dead or dying, perhaps following a confrontation about money.
But defence lawyer Quentin Duff said there was no evidence of a breakdown in the relationship between DeLuney and her mother.
There was only evidence, he said, of "an ordinary and loving relationship, albeit with its own problems".
ADVERTISEMENT
He asked the jury not to accept that they were being asked to decide that DeLuney had killed her mother, without knowing why.
He argued the police investigation had failed to consider other suspects - by 7 February, it had narrowed down to DeLuney only.
Helen Gregory. (Source: rnz.co.nz)
"Of course she should have been a suspect," Duff said. "In none of our cross examination have we criticised that."
But he said there should have been two others - the first, a mysterious person who knocked on the door of a house further up the street that same night but left before the homeowner answered.
The second was someone who left a coffee cup in a pot plant at Gregory's address, which Duff said was never investigated, and should have been.
The Crown argued on Friday it was DeLuney who took that money, and she who put the idea of the handyman being the culprit in her mother's head.
ADVERTISEMENT
Duff drew the jury's attention to the "myth" of the attic fall, which had "perpetuated itself right throughout the way of this investigation, through to this trial".
He said DeLuney had told them about the fall, but had never claimed that had been the cause of death - rather, the police had latched onto that, and worked to disprove it.
"They were hellbent, you might think, on disproving and exposing Ms DeLuney for being a liar."
He also accused the police of inserting themselves into the story, to make judgement calls on what DeLuney had done.
But he said DeLuney's decisions made sense when you considered what we had heard about the people involved.
The court heard that, on a past occasion, Gregory had fallen out of her bed - therefore, it made sense for DeLuney to put her on the floor.
It heard her Gregory hated hospitals, and was scared of being put in a home. On top of that, DeLuney was scared of being blamed for letting her mother climb into the attic in the first place - so it made sense that she didn't call an ambulance.
ADVERTISEMENT
And it made sense, Duff said, that DeLuney would leave her mother to fetch her husband, Antonio - if the injury was minor, and all she needed was monitoring overnight, it would be "a load shared" to fetch someone who happened to know CPR, Duff said.
"That's common sense."
The defence's closing argument continues this afternoon.
rnz.co.nz
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Harley-Davidson at centre of Northland drug bust, Operation Freya, forfeited to Crown
A Harley-Davidson Wide Glide became the quiet linchpin in the legal fallout of Operation Freya – a covert drug investigation that exposed Northland's criminal underworld. Now, nearly four years after the bust, the High Court has approved a settlement that finalises the motorcycle's fate. Operation Freya was a six-month investigation
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Serial sex offender Luca Fairgray's prison sentence cut on appeal
In June, Fairgray's lawyer Susan Gray told the Court of Appeal that his sentence and its starting point was 'manifestly excessive'. A starting point (for example: four years' prison) is the sentence which a judge decides on before taking into account aggravating or mitigating factors that may increase or reduce a sentence. A judge uses any comparable cases to determine what that starting point is. Gray submitted 'a lack of consistency is a lack of justice' and she pointed to another case where a man who had ongoing sex with one minor and one-off sex with another was given a starting point of 2.5 years in prison. She acknowledged the pregnancy and abortion that occurred because of Fairgray's offending, and its distressing impact, but said it was wrong for the judge to attribute the second surgical intervention needed to her client. Gray also took issue with the Crown's submission that the victim was vulnerable due to her age, as she said it was inherent in the charge. The seven-year age gap between Fairgray and the complainant was at the lower end of the spectrum, she said. 'There was no breach of trust.' Prosecutor Pip McNabb said the real issue before the court was whether the four-year starting point was available to Judge Thomas. She told the Justices the victim's vulnerability was about much more than just her age and included her autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) diagnosis. 'At the lowest end of that seven-year age gap we have a 13-year-old girl, so she had just become a teenager.' At the other end of the spectrum, she said, was an educated 20-year-old male. She did not agree that Fairgray's own diagnoses of autism and ADHD tempered the difference between the pair. His offending was 'calculated and careful', she said, and he actively pursued the girl despite knowing her age. McNabb submitted that while the second surgery could not be directly attributed to the appellant, it was his actions of having unprotected sex with her that led to it. The Crown maintained that there were some efforts by him to manipulate the victim. Luca Fairgray pictured when he testified in the Auckland District Court earlier this year. The three appeal judges hearing the case agreed with Fairgray's lawyer that the starting point taken by the sentencing judge was too high. In its decision, released by Justice Rachel Dunningham this afternoon, the appeal court said there were clearly adverse effects on the victim through having to endure a termination of her pregnancy. 'However, there was no abuse of trust, nor was there a significant age gap (comparatively speaking) between the offender and the victim. There were also no other aggravating features present such as grooming, or abusive or demeaning behaviour. This assessment points to a lower starting point than was adopted in R v H [the case the sentencing judge used as a comparison] and we would adopt three and a half years,' she said. After taking that starting point, the Court of Appeal then added on six months to Fairgray's jail term due to the fact his offending followed crimes of a similar nature (the same uplift imposed by Judge Evangelos Thomas at his sentencing). As a result, the Court of Appeal cut Fairgray's final sentence to four years' jail. Katie Harris is an Auckland-based journalist who covers issues including sexual assault, workplace misconduct, media, crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2020. Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Key moments during the month-long trial of Julia DeLuney
Julia Deluney at the High Court in Wellington. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Warning: This article contains graphic images which some readers may find distressing. An outburst from the dock, a "bizarre" conversation with a relative about her dead mother's money at her funeral, and a murdered woman who was "not planning to die tomorrow" - these are some of the pivotal moments during the month-long trial of Julia DeLuney. The trial at the High Court in Wellington lasted four and a half weeks, and the jury took just over a day to reach its verdict . The court heard evidence from forensic experts to accountants, and in the end, the jurors sided with the Crown, finding DeLuney guilty of murdering her 79-year-old mother Helen Gregory in her Baroda Street home in the Wellington suburb of Khandallah on 24 January, 2024. Helen Gregory and Julia DeLuney together on Christmas Day at Gregory's Baroda Street home in 2023, in a photo taken off DeLuney's phone by police. Photo: SUPPLIED Here are some of the trial's notable moments. In the trial's early stages, the jury heard from police officers about how their investigation shifted from unexplained death to murder. Detective Luke Hensley said when he arrived in the hours following the 111 call, the death was not being treated as suspicious. But he said the blood around the house struck him as strange - as did the fact DeLuney had left her mother on the bedroom floor after her alleged fall from the attic, to drive back to Kāpiti to pick up her husband, rather than calling an ambulance. An image from the Khandallah house where 79-year-old Helen Gregory was killed, shown at the trial of Julia Deluney. Photo: Supplied The jury had by then seen photos of blood smeared on the walls in the hallway, and in and around the utility cupboard through which the attic was accessed by way of a ladder built into the back wall. DeLuney told police her mother had climbed into the attic to put away a stack of toilet roll, and fallen, causing a small wound on the back of her head. She said she left her mother in the bedroom lying down, and at that stage, there was not a lot of blood. When she returned to the house with her husband, it looked, in her own words, "like a warzone". An image from the Khandallah house shown at the trial of Julia Deluney. Photo: Supplied Forensic scientist Glenys Knight said she knew quickly she was dealing with a homicide . She said the blood smeared on the hallway walls looked like it had been applied with fabric. Defence lawyer Quentin Duff asked whether it could have been applied by someone staggering around the house. "I've never seen it in my experience," Knight replied. Crown prosecutor Stephanie Bishop asked the jury: Why would a burglar stage the scene? And how would they know to stage it as a fall from the attic, the same story DeLuney would later tell the police? She said the only person who would benefit from staging the scene was DeLuney herself. Julia DeLuney on CCTV buying a lighter at the Mobil petrol station in Johnsonville, on her way from her mother's to her own home in Paraparaumu, at 9.52pm on 24 January, 2024. Photo: Supplied In trial week three, the court heard from Gregory's brother Peter Wilson, who lives in Australia, who told the court about a conversation he'd had with DeLuney, his niece, at the funeral. "What do you know about the kitchen?" she had asked him. "Is any money hidden in the kitchen?" Wilson said he told her he knew nothing - which he explained to the court was a deliberate withholding of information, as months earlier, he had helped his sister hide money underneath a kitchen drawer. The court had already heard from witnesses about Gregory's mistrust of banks, and the way she hid thousands of dollars around the house - including $50,000 in the freezer, and various amounts wedged between salad bowls. Wilson said the conversation at the funeral was "really bizarre", and then DeLuney asked: "What do you know about Helen's diaries?" to which he also replied, nothing. That wasn't the only shocking piece of evidence to come out of Wilson's testimony. Police at the Baroda Street house in January 2024. Photo: RNZ / Ashleigh McCaull The court heard Gregory had had a fall in September 2023, which Wilson and his wife learned when they dropped in on her the day after a family gathering. DeLuney answered the door and showed them in, and Wilson said when he saw his sister lying in bed, he was shocked. "I thought she was dead," he told the court. "Blew me away." He said to DeLuney, "You have to ring an ambulance," and she said she had already called a relative, who would be there "soon". But Wilson said about 40 minutes passed, with DeLuney tending to her mother, feeding her lemonade through a straw, so he went outside and called the relative himself. "I said [relative's name], um, [Helen's] not very well, and Julia's rung you?" "And [they] said, 'No she hasn't, nobody's rung me today.'" Julia DeLuney pictured on CCTV at the BP station in Johnsonville, on her way to her mother's house, at 5.47pm on 24 January 2024. Photo: Supplied On July 14 - the beginning of trial week four - the court heard audio from a phone call Gregory made to her bank, on the evening of January 23, 2024. The purpose of the call was to take out money to pay withdrawal fees on cryptocurrency profits, which DeLuney had invested in on her behalf. The court would later hear evidence that those fees were "false", and that the profit DeLuney had told her mother about did not exist - she had in fact sent her a screenshot of someone else's cryptocurrency account, which had made a large profit, as though it was her own. DeLuney also asked her mother not to reveal to the bank that she needed the money for anything to do with cryptocurrency. Gregory told the bank employee on the phone: "We're pre-paying a funeral thing. Not that I'm thinking of dying tomorrow or anything." It was met by a collective intake of breath from the public gallery. The Crown later argued this was Gregory handing over the last of her money to her daughter - a potential flash point in their relationship that led to an altercation, and ultimately her death, the next day. The Crown was the first to close its case, with prosecutor Stephanie Bishop running the members of the jury through their version of what happened that night. DeLuney had remained mostly silent for the duration of the trial. The court had heard her statements to police and watched the video interviews, but had not heard from DeLuney herself. She sat in the dock, flanked by two security guards - normal procedure, the justice explained to the jury at the beginning of the trial, and not to be taken as a sign DeLuney was dangerous or presumed guilty. But her outburst came after a CCTV footage was played to the court, showing someone checking the communal skip in the carpark of the DeLuneys' apartment complex in Paraparaumu in the early hours of the morning following the death, after her first interview with police. The jury had seen this footage before, when it was played as evidence, but this time Bishop told the jury what she wanted them to take from it. Julia DeLuney, pictured on CCTV from a camera on the side of a rubbish truck, placing a black bin bag in a rubbish bin at 6.58am on 25 January, 2024. Photo: Supplied "In the morning, having been to the police station to provide a statement, one of them [the DeLuneys] then exits their vehicle and then walks immediately to the skip bin," she said. "Again, members of the jury, what plausible explanation could there be for this?" At that point, DeLuney called out harshly: "Our dogs!" The court had already heard evidence that the DeLuneys owned two dearly loved dogs, which according to police they expressed concern about leaving alone on more than one occasion. A short time later, DeLuney kicked the wall of the dock in front of her, causing a loud thud in the quiet of the courtroom. At the close of the Crown's case, the defence declined to call witnesses, and DeLuney did not give evidence herself . The Justice reminded the jury during his summing up that no guilt should be read into this. Antonio DeLuney, her husband, did not give evidence either. The court had already heard the pair lived together in an apartment in Paraparaumu. On the night of her mother's death, DeLuney sent a photo to Antonio of herself and her mother in her mother's wardrobe, telling him they were trying on clothes. Julia DeLuney and Helen Gregory, pictured in Gregory's walk-in wardrobe. DeLuney sent the photo to her husband Antonio the night of Gregory's death telling him they were trying on clothes. Photo: SUPPLIED Then, she missed a handful of calls and messages from him later in the evening, and had a conversation lasting only 17 seconds before she returned to Paraparaumu to pick him up. The court heard he was asleep when she arrived, but returned to her mother's Baroda St address with her, where they found Gregory badly injured. Both DeLuneys gave statements to the police that night, but Antonio's was not read in court, and he did not give evidence. While he previously sought name suppression alongside his wife's before the case went to trial - both were declined - he does not face charges relating to this event. The jury was sent out to deliberate about 1pm on Tuesday and they reached their verdict just before 5pm on Wednesday. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
