A lawyer for the man who lit the fatal Loafers Lodge blaze says for the jury to accept the Crown's case, "massive guesswork and speculation" would be involved.
The 50-year-old defendant, whose name is suppressed, is charged with five counts of murder and one of arson after setting the Wellington hostel alight on 16 May, 2023.
His lawyers say the man - who has schizophrenia and has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity - lit the fire when he was experiencing serious psychotic symptoms.
But the Crown says he knew lighting the fire was wrong, and he did so because he did not like living at Loafers Lodge and wanted better accommodation.
During closing arguments for the defence on Tuesday, Louise Sziranyi said there was no evidence to support that.
"If you were to go with that theory, you would have to involve yourself in massive guesswork and speculation," she told the jury.
She said the man was more mentally unwell than anyone realised when he lit the fire.
Sziranyi said he may have seemed calm in the CCTV footage the jury saw, but that footage also captured some "breakthrough symptoms".
She listed a number of examples in the days leading up to the fire: the defendant was seen hiding a knife in his shirt, putting his middle finger up to a CCTV camera and pacing throughout the lodge.
"He does pound... in and out, up and down at Loafers Lodge, there's a notable increase in the tempo.
"The defence would say to you he becomes more manic, you can just tell."
She also pointed to the man's police interview in which he seemed "placid" - but an officer said the man later yelled and swore at him, which was not captured by the camera.
"His mood completely changes... the defence says to you this is a breakthrough symptom, showing that underneath what appeared to be a calm surface, the defendant was more unwell than anyone realised."
She said there was no reason for him to light the fire other than mental unwellness.
That was supported by the defendant saying he believed people were out to get him, and voices in his head told him the only way to stop them was to light the fire, Sziranyi said.
Psychiatric evidence
During the Crown's closing arguments, Crown lawyer Grant Burston called into question the opinion of the defence's key witness, Dr Krishna Pillai.
Pillai believed the defendant was insane when he lit the fire.
Sziranyi told the jury he was an extremely experienced and well-qualified forensic psychiatrist.
He had a different opinion to the five experts called by the Crown, but he had given the court his professional opinion which he was entitled to, she said.
Sziranyi said some of those experts had put weight on the inconsistencies in the defendant's own account of the night of the fire and his mental state at the time.
But she said the differences were not surprising, given they showed up in dozens of interviews with different psychiatrists over about seven months, while he was on a "journey" from being incredibly unwell to managing his illness through medication.
The lies he told - including his denial of lighting the fire - showed he was "disconnected from reality, delusional, unwell", she said.
Sziranyi argued the Crown had not proven beyond reasonable doubt that he knew people could die in the fire - which was a requirement to find him guilty of murder and arson
On Monday, in the Crown's closing arguments, Burston said the defendant had "not even come close" to proving he was insane at the time.
SHARE ME