By Lloyd Burr and Angela Beswick
The pathologist who examined the body of murdered Fielding man Scott Guy says he was most likely killed by one close gun shot to the chin which ricocheted off onto his face, neck and arms.
John Rutherford, who has carried out more than 6438 post mortems, gave evidence at the Ewen Macdonald murder trial and recalled the most likely scenario in which Mr Guy was killed.
He says the killer was probably standing a few metres away and when the trigger was pulled, the majority of the shotgun pellets hit his chin and neck with the rest scattering to his face and arms.
It left Mr Guy with a wound 13 cm long and up to 5 cm wide around his neck and through his voice box.
Mr Rutherford says it was close range because the ammunition’s wadding was found lodged in Mr Guy’s neck.
He says there were more than 250 pellets found in the body.
Under cross examination by defence lawyer Greg King, Mr Rutherford said it was most likely one shot that killed him, however, he wouldn’t rule out more.
“You can explain them as one discharge but cannot exclude more than one discharge. I am content in my examination that it was one,” he told the court.
He says Mr Guy’s death would have been “pretty quick” and he would have been “disabled” in a matter of seconds.
Farm not big enough to support three families
In the days before Scott was killed, Ewen Macdonald raised concerns the Guy farm wasn’t big enough to sustain three families, the court has heard.
Giving evidence at the High Court in Wellington this afternoon, Macdonald’s wife Anna said the weekend before the murder, her parents Jo and Bryan Guy attended a conference focussed on farm planning.
When they came back, she says, a few issues needed addressing.
Anna told the court her parents were going to have a farm management meeting with her and Macdonald, as well as her brother Scott and his wife Kylee – so that everyone was on the same page.
In the days immediately after the conference, Anna says there were a few ideas heard through the farm grapevine and Macdonald was worried about what was being said.
“He was a little concerned about what direction the farm was going, because the farm wasn’t big enough to keep three families going.”
Anna says Macdonald had spoken to his brother-in-law, Mr Guy, who said the farm needed to look at other avenues in order to make money.
One of those options was to move one family to another farm, to manage it and making money that way.
“We discussed that we didn’t want to be the ones who moved. He loved doing the dairy farming and wanted to stay on Byreburn,” Anna says.
She and Macdonald decided that if they were asked, they would say they wanted to stay and run the dairy unit where they were.
One of the ideas that came out of the conference, which Mr Guy had come up with, was creating a lake at the back of the farm for water sports and jet boating.
Anna says Macdonald rolled his eyes when Mr Guy brought up the lake idea and wasn’t a fan of it.
The aftermath of the farming conference
Mr Guy’s father Bryan also gave evidence this afternoon, saying the remuneration scheme on the farm had needed addressing.
“What we identified early on in the programme was that we had three salaries going out of the farm and that wasn’t sustainable.
“We really wanted to increase the income into the farm.”
Bryan Guy says a number of options were floated regarding how to increase profit, including share milking, leasing another farm and buying new cows or just manage someone else’s farm for them.
Either of those options would not require a family to move from the farm, he told the court.
“My thoughts were that you wouldn’t need to move.
“Managing someone else farm wouldn’t mean you would have to relocate necessarily.”
Bryan Guy also said he approached Macdonald after the conference because he had heard of concerns he had about the future of Byreburn Farm.
“I know Ewen had concerns about long term milking cows on the property. I went through it with him to try alleviate those fears.”
Bryan Guy says a meeting had been planned for September, when the whole family would get together and talk about their visions and what each of their goals and aspirations were.
Ewen Macdonald's police interviews
Boot size questioned
This morning the jury heard more about how police narrowed in on the type of boot they allege was worn by his killer.
The Crown alleges murder accused Ewen Macdonald owned a pair of Proline dive boots that matched footprints found at the scene.
But defence lawyer Greg King has been counting the number of distinctive wavy lines on the moulds taken from boot prints at the scene and claims they do not match the lines on a size 9 boot – the size the Crown argues Macdonald wore.
Impressions from the scene at Aorangi Rd show 32 wavy lines from the toe of the boot to the middle. However, a size 9 boot examined by police had 29 wavy lines.
Mr King asked police ESR scientist David Neale if the size 9 boot he was asked to examine could have left the impressions with 32 lines in it.
Mr Neale answered: “no”.
“There is no way in the world they could be a pair of size 9 boots,” Mr King says.
Mr Neale replied by saying he has not seen every pair of Proline size 9 boots, so could not confirm.
Mr King claims the footprints had to have been left by someone wearing a size 11 boot.
Mr Neale says it is more reliable to measure the type of shoe by length rather than the number of wave patterns.
“I believe I can make a good estimation of the size of the shoe based on the impressions.”
Mr Neale explained to the court that the soles on the boots would be made from a giant cookie cutter and a slight movement in the cutting process could result in more wavy line rows.
He also said the factory which supplied the sole to the boot manufacturer could have had varying ways of making the mould.
“I couldn’t say if it was a rogue batch - it could be a different batch altogether. I don’t know how many boots were made and how many different batches there were,” he says.
Mr King argues that if Macdonald had a pair of Proline dive boots, his foot measurement shows he would be more suited to a size 7 - which have a wavy line count of 25.
This morning the High Court in Wellington heard how Mr Neale had analysed the boot impressions left at the scene, of which there were more than 50.
Mr Neale says the scene impressions were consistent with a size 9 or size 10 boot, ruling out a size 7 because it was too small and a size 11 because they were too big.
He also presented to the court an impression of Macdonald’s foot, taken during the investigation.
“It fit within the boundaries of the size 9 cast from the exemplar boot, and a size 10, and the casts found at the scene,” he says.
Mr Neale added the Proline boots were made of rubber and were stretchy so someone could wear a pair of dive boots that were too small for them.
In his analysis, Mr Neale was sent a number of different sized Proline W375 dive boots by police to compare with the imprints found at the scene. He says the boot-type were a match.
“In my opinion, it was the Proline dive boot design or a design that was close to it which was used to leave the impressions at 293 Aorangi Rd,” he told the court.
Mr Neale says his analysis shows the boots which left the impressions at the scene were not new because the wavy pattern was squashed and wearing was evident.
He is currently analysing what size of boot left the impression.
The Crown claims Macdonald purchased a pair of size 9 Proline dive boots from Manawatu Hunting and Fishing in 2003. They have also produced a number of photos of Macdonald wearing or sitting next to Proline boots on hunting trips in 2004 and 2005.
Yesterday, the court heard how the search for the item of footwear that had left the pattern around Mr Guy’s body went as far as the FBI in the United States, as well as databases in Canada and Australia.
The Crown argues Macdonald wore the Proline dive boots on the night he murdered Mr Guy, however the boots have never been found.
In evidence given last week, Macdonald’s wife Anna said her husband owned an array of boots, but she could not remember if he owned diving boots.
She says he kept heaps of boots in a cupboard at the back door of their house.
“Ewen owned all sorts of boots, tall boots, short boots, farm boots, the kids boots, they are all just dumped in there,” she says.
She told the High Court in Wellington she remembers wanting to throw one dive boot out in 2008 when they moved from the farm cottage to the main farm house.
However, she cannot remember physically throwing it out.
The Crown has indicated its evidence will be wrapped up on Wednesday but it is unclear yet whether the defence will call any witnesses.
Macdonald has admitted to acts of intimidation toward Scott and wife Kylee, including vandalising their new home and setting fire to an old farm house on their property. However, he denies murdering his brother-in-law.
3 News
source: newshub archive
