Six men accused of murdering Wayne Kerry Bray in a Timaru street have today elected not to call evidence.
The trial before Justice Mark Cooper and a jury in the High Court at Christchurch has now moved straight on to closing addresses. It is the trial's 20th day.
When the crown closed its case yesterday afternoon, after calling evidence from 92 witnesses, the trial paused to hear legal arguments in the absence of the jury.
Once decisions had been made on those matters, the trial resumed late this morning, and crown prosecutor Tim Gresson began his lengthy closing address to the jury at 11.20am.
The six on trial are John Oliver Jamieson, 20, a fisherman, Morgan Christopher James Parker, 17, a freezing worker, Simon Antony Anglem, 17, a labourer, Ashley Jordan Moffat, 17, a butcher, Nicholas John Peters, 17, a freezing worker, and Daniel Raymond Kreegher, 19, a boner.
They deny jointly murdering 26-year-old Mr Bray in a group attack near the corner of Bouverie Street and Luxmoore Road late on February 2.
Mr Gresson told the jurors the street attack was "a classic joint enterprise case" He told them they would only have to consider manslaughter verdicts if they were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the murder charges had been proved.
To find the accused guilty, the jury would have to find that the accused participated in the group attack either as a principal or as a secondary party.
The principals would be those who participated in the fatal punching, kicking, or stomping of Mr Bray.
The secondary parties were those who went 200m down the hill on Bouverie Street and were present at the scene and effectively joined the group, providing assistance by weight of numbers or providing encouragement "begging on the others" in the words of one witness.
"Under our law, a person who is a party to a crime is equally as guilty as the principal," Mr Gresson said.
It was not always possible to define who was a principal and who was a secondary party. But in that situation it was sufficient for the crown to satisfy the jury that each of the accused must have been either a principal or a secondary party.
"If you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that they all participated one way or another, it will not be necessary for the precise part played by each accused to be identified," he said.
He said the jury also needed to be satisfied that the accused had the necessary murderous intent, or knew that death was a likely consequence and was willing to run the risk.
He said a person could not be a party if they accidentally or inadvertently helped someone to commit a crime, but that was not the case in this trial.
