The jury hearing the trial of former South Otago sharemilker Neil Woodward on charges of arson and threatening to kill will be asked to make a decision in the case today.
Woodward (44) has denied burning down two large farm sheds and a smoko hut on the Wharetoa dairy farm where he was employed for about 18 months until September 2013.
He also denies seven charges of threatening to kill people including family members, his former employer and two other people.
His trial, before Judge Michael Crosbie and a jury, began in the Dunedin District Court last Tuesday. Crown evidence in the case was completed yesterday and the defence did not elect to call any evidence.
The Crown essentially says Woodward burned down the sheds on February 25, 2014, because he was angry and resentful at the premature ending of the sharemilking contract he and his wife had with the farm owner. The contract was cancelled in 2013, after only about a season and a half.
Crown counsel Craig Power pointed to the defendant's angry reaction to the involvement of the farm owner and his wife in work Woodward saw as his responsibility as the sharemilker.
Even after it was agreed Woodward's wife would be the point of contact for any discussions between farm owner and sharemilkers, things between the defendant and the farm owner became worse.
Woodward knew the location of the sheds and was living nearby. There was no evidence of any strangers being seen around the sheds, which were about 280m from the road. Yet they were targeted, rather than another shed which was much closer to the road, Mr Power said.
And evidence from one of Woodward's prison cell-mates about threats the defendant made against his wife, children, former employer and others was the defendant seemed to have intense resentment towards them. The cellmate had nothing to gain from making a false report about the defendant, Mr Power said.
Defence counsel Anne Stevens reminded the jurors an expert fire investigator could not say definitively how the fire happened, that there were several starting points and more than one person could have been involved. The barns were open and easily accessible across open paddocks.
And for the Crown to suggest there had been an issue about fires around the farm before the barn fire had been "blown out of all proportion'', Mrs Stevens said. The farm owner had asked Woodward to restrict any burning to steel drums "and that's what he did''. There was no suggestion he threatened to burn down the sheds.
While the defendant told police he had not seen the fire because he had gone to his part-time milking job on another farm and his wife had said he was in bed asleep when she woke on the morning of the fire, Mrs Stevens reminded the jury Mrs Woodward was interviewed very close to the time of the fire. Her recall was likely to be more accurate that the defendant's, as police did not speak to him until 15 months later.
As to the alleged threats, the cell-mate had agreed when questioned that Woodward had been talking about threatening emails he had sent his wife from the UK, the threats for which he was in prison.
Judge Crosbie will sum up the case to the jurors today before asking them to consider their verdict.
