Dingoes Ate My Boyfriend - the final stretch

The judge has continued his summing up in the trial of Bradley Murdoch, alleged murderer of Peter Falconio and alleged abductor of Joanne Lees. See, this is why trials are so expensive. Last week, they worked Monday Tuesday and Wednesday, then had a day off on Thursday so a juror could go to a funeral, and didn't drag themselves back to work till today, Monday. Even then, a "day" in court barely warrants the term.

The judge started summing up last Wednesday, but presumably had to remind the jury today of what he said. He'll continue tomorrow and then the jury may get to consider their verdict come lunchtime. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the first vote.

Anyway ABC News reports:

A Darwin jury has been told it would be unfair to reason that Peter Falconio's alleged murderer was a man of bad character because he ran illegal drugs across the country.
...
Chief Justice Brian Martin said because Murdoch traded in cannabis, carried a gun and took amphetamines did not mean the accused had committed murder and assault."

I'm glad he clarified that. Just because he's driving across the desert with a fuel tank full of illegal drugs and carrying an illegal gun doesn't mean he's a bad guy. You know you're in Australia when...

The jury was also told to ignore Joanne Lees' evidence about the man on the petrol station security video. She said she thought it was the man who assaulted her, and other witnesses have said that the man caught on CCTV was Murdoch. But Lees didn't see Murdoch walking, and couldn't otherwise tell it was him.

However, because Murdoch denies it was him on camera, and because other people testify that it was him, if the jury believes the other witnesses, then it means Murdoch is lying about that. And if he's lying about that, what else is he lying about?

So the case rests on that, was it him or not, and the DNA evidence: was it planted/contaminated after the event?

It's a pretty flimsy prosecution case, in the end, after two months of trial. The judge has dismissed Joanne Lees' identification of Murdoch on CCTV, and has told the jury to forget that Murdoch ran drugs and carried guns. Plenty of scope for reasonable doubt, which leaves Lees in the precarious position of wondering what the police will say, should Murdoch be found not guilty.

"We're not looking for anybody else..." Or, "Joanne Lees, I'm arresting you for the murder of Peter Falconio..."?