GUILTY UK - Det. Leanne McKie, 39, found dead in Cheshire lake, 28 Sept 2017

DAY NINE BEGINS
Trial resumes - jury to be shown CCTV footage

​Day nine of the trial is underway here at Chester Crown Court. The public gallery is half full, with some family members present.

The prosecutor Nigel Power QC tells the jury they are about to see a video compilation of CCTV footage including maps. The video is played to the jurors.


15:00 KEY EVENT
BREAKING: Darren McKie admits manslaughter, continues to deny murder

In a surprise development, the defendant Darren McKie has admitted manslaughter although he continues to deny murdering his wife.

He changed his manslaughter plea as the trial resumed this afternoon and the prosecution finished its case.

Insp McKie was asked to stand in the dock and the charge of manslaughter was read out to him again. Asked how he pleaded, he answered: “Guilty.”

The jurors are told by the judge he continues to deny the murder charge.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526

[The CPS aren't going to accept that, are they?]
 
Wow, yes I don’t know the implications of a change of plea part way through the trial?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wow, yes I don’t know the implications of a change of plea part way through the trial?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Looks like he's still being charged with murder. He can't explain way the evidence, can he?

I was wondering why there was no court this morning.
________________

15:09
Judge tells jury they'll still need to consider murder charge

The judge, Mr Justice Spencer, tells the jurors that the defendant had admitted unlawfully killing his wife by his change of plea.

However, he stressed Insp McKie continued to deny murder and the issue for them to decided now was whether he intended to kill or her or cause her serious harm.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526
 
15:42
Insp McKie will not be giving evidence

Trevor Burke QC, defending, tells the jury he would be calling no evidence and confirmed his client would not be giving evidence.

On Wednesday the jurors had been told that the defendant would be giving evidence.

The jurors are told that the surprise development brought an end to the evidence they would hear.

The judge, Mr Justice Spencer, told the jurors not to speculate or worry about the development and that they should not be tempted to discuss the case at home.

The jurors are sent home for the day and told to return on Monday when the barristers are due to make their closing speeches.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526
 
As the prosecution concluded it’s case at Chester Crown Court on Thursday, the defendant’s barrister Trevor Burke QC invited the clerk of the court to put the manslaughter charge to the defendant again.

He was ordered to stand in the glass-fronted dock and when asked how he pleaded he replied: “Guilty.”

His tearful family watched from the public gallery moments after he entered the changed plea.

Trevor Burke QC, defending, told the jury he would be calling no evidence and confirmed his client would not be giving evidence.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...ws/leanne-mckie-murder-trial-poynton-14416578
 
That's a surprise but I was always shocked that he had the cheek to deny it in the first place. Now, was it planned or a heat of the moment thing? I'd say heat of the moment.

Thanks LB for the updates.
 
That's a surprise but I was always shocked that he had the cheek to deny it in the first place. Now, was it planned or a heat of the moment thing? I'd say heat of the moment.

Thanks LB for the updates.

Yes, was wondering earlier what the defence tactic would be to explain away all the circumstances that were stacking up.

From what I've read, I'd agree with heat of the moment in the sense that I don't think murder crossed his mind in advance of the confrontation about the financial situation.

On the other hand how much premeditation is required, in others cases, just minutes of forethought counts as premeditated. Is a 3 minute strangulation long enough to think and stop before murder occurs?

There must be a point between starting strangulation and finishing whereby you realise this isn't just a heated assault, it now becomes clear that continuing will result in death.
 
I have been reading the CPS guidelines on Homicide to try and understand why McKie was charged with murder and/or manslaughter. Does anyone understand these charges?
Leanne's injuries were extreme, 2 broken neck bones plus the blood around her nose
.
She seemed a slightly built woman of short stature and her husband is taller and weightier than her so she would have been compromised in any attack.

I don't think there was premeditation here, but intentional violence (GBH) certainly, and surely there is a time when an attacker realises what they are doing might lead to death.

Is it possible McKie's defence might go for "loss of control" as a defence for manslaughter?

Can we believe anything McKie says since he has lied throughout the trial about what happened and he went to lengths to dispose of Leanne's body?

Just asking the questions going through my mind - fortunately I'm not on the jury.



https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter

Definition of Homicide
Murder and manslaughter are two of the offences that constitute homicide.

Manslaughter can be committed in one of three ways:

killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, namely loss of control, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact.

conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and did kill, is manslaughter ("gross negligence manslaughter"); and

conduct taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm, that resulted in death, is manslaughter ("unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter").


Murder
Subject to three exceptions (see Voluntary Manslaughter below) the crime of murder is committed, where a person:

of sound mind and discretion (i.e. sane);

unlawfully kills (i.e. not self-defence or other justified killing);
any reasonable creature (human being);

in being (born alive and breathing through its own lungs - Rance v Mid-Downs Health Authority (1991) 1 All ER 801 and AG Ref No 3 of 1994 (1997) 3 All ER 936;
under the Queen's Peace;

with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH).
 
I have been reading the CPS guidelines on Homicide to try and understand why McKie was charged with murder and/or manslaughter. Does anyone understand these charges?

I'm wondering if it is tactics:
  • Defendant initially pleads not guilty to murder at first court hearing
  • Prosecution offer manslaughter charge as well as murder to try to get agreement that the defendant did kill (as it appears easy to prove that bit) and hopefully can concentrate on the evidence that proves murder over manslaughter
  • Defendant pleads not guilty to manslaughter and intends to testify
  • Prosecution waste time proving defendant killed victim to ensure that the lesser charge of manslaughter is proven.
  • Defendant later pleads guilty to manslaughter after all prosecution evidence is heard. Majority of the prosecution case is now redundant as the case for killing is now agreed..
  • Defendant also decides not to testify to limit the evidence to what has already been said and give the defence the chance to diminish the murder element without incriminating the defendant any further.
  • Prosecution witnesses now left to try to prove murder under cross examination when their work in proving the killing is now wasted.
 
Thank you for your considered reply @tallmansix, certainly helps my understanding of McKie being charged with the two counts, as you say it comes down to tactics.

Though I've followed a number of trials I don't recall a similar situation of the accused changing plea to the lesser charge during the trial - must have happened before, just I cannot recall atm and sent me on interesting (and time consuming!) searches of law and cases.

Hope this isn't o/t but just in case anyone may be interested posting this link again https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter
and scrolling down to Alternative Counts is a specific section setting out guidelines for this in homicide cases.

The summing up on Monday will be very interesting indeed I think.

Again many thanks to LB for the updates.
 
What is the usual time length for the judge to post a sentence after the verdict?
 
What is the usual time length for the judge to post a sentence after the verdict?

Generally I think it's the next day or two. Sometimes a few of weeks if they need psychiatric reports etc.

Pretty sure in the Ellie Butler trial the judge proceeded to the sentencing phase straight after the verdict. The sentencing judgement was online by teatime the same day.

It all depends, there's victim impact statements, mitigation etc.

I'd say normally within 2 days.
 
DAY TEN – 14:40
Day ten - Prosecution closing speeches

Nigel Power QC, prosecuting, is in the middle of his closing speech here at Chester Crown Court.

The barrister reminds the jurors of the evidence of the pathologist Dr Rodgers, who Mr Power described as an ‘assured and reliable witness’.

The jurors are reminded that pathologist described bruising to the neck and ‘two significant fractures’ of bones in the neck.

The pathologists had said the first fractured bone was a ‘typical’ injury you would see with a compression of the neck, the jurors are told.

The second bone had ‘cracked completely’, according to Dr Rodgers.

Dr Rodgers, Mr Power reminds the jury, had said the compression of the neck had been ‘prolonged’ and had lasted at least a minute.


14:51
Prosecution barrister outlines assessment jury needs to make

The pathologist had said the bruising found to Leanne McKie’s mouth had suggested pressure had been applied to her mouth, the jurors are told.

Mr Power suggested the defendant had put his hands over his wife’s mouth to prevent the neighbours from hearing anything.

“Just how loud was she screaming for that to be necessary?” asked Mr Power.

He continued: “That’s a vital aspect of the evidence: your assessment of whether the defendant was acting in a determined pursuit of causing at least bodily harm or whether your intention was was only to cause minor harm that went tragically wrong.”


15:04
Barrister timed a minute in complete silence to demonstrate ‘utterly compelling evidence’ of strangulation

Mr Power tells the jurors that the Crown’s case is that the defendant’s action after the killing showed a ‘conscious, calculating and serious steps to cover his tracks’.

The barrister continued: “He was someone able and determined to carry out whatever he wanted to carry out.”

The evidence from the pathologists about the strangulation was ‘utterly compelling evidence’, he added.

The injury had suggested ‘prolonged force’, said Mr Power, reminding the jury the pathologist had said it would have taken at least a minute to strangle Leanne McKie.

The barrister asked: “If you did it for so long, would you be able to feel the life literally ebbing away from the person you are strangling?”

He continued: “Let’s see how long a minute might feel. Imagine during that minute the defendant with his one hand over his wife’s mouth and throughout that time exerting a significant degree of pressure or significant force.”

The barrister then timed a minute during which there was complete silence in court two.


15:18
Prosecution lists 'lies' Inspector McKie is said to have told police

The jurors are told that the defendant had lied and told ‘absolute whoppers’ during his police interview.

Mr Power said:

He told a number of lies, huge lies, absolute whoppers designed to frustrate the police and designed to carry on with the cover up.​

The barrister then listed eleven lies the defendant is said to have told police.

1. That his wife knew the surveyor was coming

2. That he got home between 12.30pm and 1pm.

3. That he went out at midnight rather than 10.30pm

4. That he turned left on Arlington Way after leaving his home rather than right towards the car.

5. He said he was ‘panicking’ about his missing wife.

6. He said he washed his clothes because of work commitments.

7. He said a text message he had received from his wife while at work had suggested everything was normal.

8. He said no-one was at home when he got home because Leanne didn’t want to be there for the visit of the surveyor.

9. He said he was getting on alright with Leanne and there were no issues.

10. He said the couple had jointly applied for a second mortgage.

11. He said he left his phone at home when he went out to look for his wife because it needed charging rather than leaving ‘cell site’ evidence.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526
 
Just for extra info =

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-43464087

Murder accused police inspector's manslaughter plea 'cowardly'

Leanne and Darren McKie both worked for Greater Manchester Police
A "despicable and wicked" police inspector committed a "cowardly volte-face" when he admitted his wife's manslaughter having previously denied killing her, a jury has been told.

Darren McKie, 43, admitted killing his detective wife, Leanne, on the ninth day of his trial at Chester Crown Court but denies her murder.


She was dead found in Poyton Lake, Cheshire on 29 September.

The court was told Mr McKie had conducted "a game of cat and mouse".

'Cat and mouse'
During his closing speech, prosecutor Nigel Power QC said: "In six hours and 49 minutes of interviews with police, he skilfully and determinedly lied when he could and made no comment when he couldn't."

He criticised the Greater Manchester Police (GMP) officer's "despicable and wicked behaviour" when he had treated the police investigation as "a game of tactics".

Mr Power said: "What produced the argument that led to her death was that he'd been found out in committing serious criminal offences."

The court heard how Mr McKie - who had 20 years of police service - forged the GMP detective constable's signature repeatedly and used her warrant number and police computer account password to obtain her payslips and P60 for a loan application.

That is an offence of misconduct in public office, the jury was told.

Mr McKie, of Wilmslow, Cheshire, made "a flurry of loan applications" in the days before he killed his wife - signing up for seven in her name in one day alone, jurors were told.

The prosecutor said: "To the outside world, the marriage was a happy one. They were described as being the perfect family."

He said they had never defaulted on a mortgage payment or
missed a loan payment, but this was "new territory".

'Determinedly strangled'
Their total debt before the mortgage was £115,000, the court heard.

The barrister told the jury that Mr McKie "determinedly strangled his wife to death".

Mr Power said it must have involved significant force for at least a minute and that proved a determined effort to cause serious harm. To demonstrate how long it lasted, he then timed a minute's silence in court.

He also ripped up a set of questions he had intended to ask Mr McKie before he changed his plea and refused to give evidence.

But the prosecutor concluded by reading 25 questions that he would have asked the defendant.

They included: "Did you think about your three children as you were killing their mother?"

Throughout the proceedings Mr McKie sat staring straight ahead and showed no emotion.

The trial continues.
 
DEFENCE CLOSING
'There is not a single word in evidence in this case by the defendant'

​Trevor Burke QC, defending, begins his closing speech on behalf of Darren McKie.

He tells the jurors that in due course the judge would outline the relevant law to them.​​

He continued: “It’s not for you​, any of you, to be tempted to ignore the legal directions my lord will give you. You do not substitute your own view of what the law should be or ought to be.

“You will simply without question apply the law my lord will drive you to.

“In addition, having concluded his directions as to the law his lordship will remind you of the evidence in this case.”

The barrister added: “May I make it absolutely clear to you.There is not a single word in evidence in this case by the defendant. None.”

The defence called neither Darren McKie nor any evidence at the conclusion of the prosecution’s case.


11:28
'If doubt persists... then the prosecution has failed'

Mr Burke continues to the jurors: “You and you alone share the burden of responsibility to return a true verdict according to the evidence you have heard in this case.

“He reminds the jury that the burden of proof is ‘a very high standard’ which entailed a ‘presumption of innocence’ and that it was for the prosecution ‘to draw you to the ireversable conclusion that the only proper verdict you could reach is one of murder’.

The barrister continues: “If however during your examination of the evidence a doubt is in your mind over whether the prosecution version of events is the only one, if that doubt persists no matter how long you have examined the evidence and you have this nagging worry, this doubt, then the prosecution has failed to prove the defendant is guilty of murder and nothing else.”


11:35
'There is but one question' for the jury to answer

Mr Burke tells the jury his client ‘acknowledges his responsibility for Leanne’s death’, reminding them he had admitted manslaughter.

But the barrister adds ‘there is but one question’ for the jury to answer.

He adds: “What did the defendant intend when he assaulted Leanne during the course of that assault and she met her untimely death?

“That’s the sole issue here. The prosecution case is simplicity itself. Murder. Nothing else. So they are required, as you appreciate, to prove it so that each and every one of you is sure of it.”


11:45
'She met her unfortunate death which was the very last thing Darren McKie would have wished'

Raising his voice, Mr Burke continues: “They have to prove that in the minute or so that led to her death Darren wanted rid of her. Dead. Wanted her dead. Intended her dead, and did it with that intention in mind. Brutally cold. Ruthless murder. That’s the prosecution case.

“All of you must be satisfied so that you have no doubt it. You must be sure.”

He said the prosecution had to be prove that Darren McKie ‘intended her really really serious injury’.

The barrister suggests there had been a struggle and ‘an attempt to silence’ his wife, and adds: “And she met her unfortunate death which was the very last thing Darren McKie would have wished, wanted or intended.”


12:02
'The family were in debt as are thousands of others'

Mr Burke praises the ‘comprehensive and thorough’ Cheshire Police investigation, pointing to the financial investigation which examined the family’s finances going back seven years.

“They scrutinised every loan, every mortgage, every bank account, every credit card, every transaction in relation to each of them. It’s safe to say as a result of that diligent work by that team you know more about the McKie family finances than you probably do your own,” said the QC.

He continued: “So much so we know for certain a number of things. The family were in debt as are thousands of others. They were always in debt. There’s never been a time when they weren’t in debt and there was nothing new in September, 2017.

“There is no question and there can be no question in your minds that they have always lived beyond their means. Always.”


https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526
 
12:42
'The added tragedy is that they were on the brink of sorting it out'

Mr Burke added: “It was a way of life for them. It was just the way it was. They had survived in the past.”

He said it was ‘a tragedy to acknowledge that they would have survived this as well’.

The QC said in most circumstances families had to display ‘teamwork’ and that both partners had to deal with the problem.

“You have to share the burden, trim your costs, tighten your belts. All of us in our daily lives share that responsibility with their partner. It’s a joint effort,” said Mr Burke.

Referring to a £54,000 loan application which was nearing completion, Mr Burke continued: “The added tragedy here is that they were on the brink of sorting it out.”

He said it would have been reasonable to expect the money to arrive within a few days or a week as the firm, Fluent Finance, had agreed the terms of the loan and the vast majority of the family’s huge credit card debts would have been cleared.

His client, he said, had been ‘very skilled’ at moving money around.


Debt was ‘nothing knew to him’ and he always managed and never defaulted on any payments, Mr Burke tells the jury.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526

[BBM. Eh? It was fraud, plain and simple.]
 
12:48
'Her untimely death did not extinguish a single penny of debt'

Mr Burke considers whether debt played a part in Leanne McKies death.

He asks whether killing his wife ‘would have resolved their debt issues’ and he adds: “It’s hundred per cent certain that it most definitely did not.”

The QC says: “His motive, if there was one, could not and could never have been ‘if I kill here I’m debt free’ because he wasn’t.”

He points out to the jurors that neither the defendant nor his wife had life assurance policies.

“Ultimately, her untimely death did not extinguish a single penny of debt,” says the QC.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-news/darren-mckie-murder-wife-trial-14368526
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
3,931
Total visitors
4,010

Forum statistics

Threads
593,649
Messages
17,990,347
Members
229,193
Latest member
imaguppynotashark
Back
Top