The primary model that prosecutor Susan Galloway put to him whereas on the stand concerned an unidentified attacker who killed Gill, ostensibly in a hijacking. He at first stated it was a risk however then didn’t need to speculate as he merely did not know.
The second model was that he discovered himself in a nook due to his affair and killed his spouse – making up cowl tales alongside the way in which, eliminating proof, and setting it as much as appear like a hijacking. Packham categorically denied this.
Here’s a breakdown of each variations that had been offered:
1) Hijacking/assault by unknown and unapprehended suspect
An individual (State referred to he) assaults or hijacks Gill round 07:00 at their Riesling Highway dwelling, as she is leaving for work. He places her physique within the boot of her inexperienced BMW and her blood probably transfers to factors within the storage. Alternatively, the blood is from accidents throughout Gill’s gardening and recycling actions. He then proceeds to drive round, not afraid of being pulled over or stopped as a result of the car’s quantity plates are lacking.
He stays within the space the place he dedicated his crime for no less than 30 minutes or leaves and comes again as a result of the BMW is seen once more at 14:00. Each he and Packham are in the identical neighborhood presently however the accused says it’s not him.
The attacker subsequently appears to be like sufficient like Packham for witnesses to have made a mistaken identification of the accused.
The BMW, the prize for which he supposedly dedicated the assault, is ultimately set alight at Diep River practice station that night.
It appeared this attacker was in the identical space about seven hours later when noticed driving away from the scene.
In line with a witness, the attacker was driving a car which was the identical mannequin, make and color as Packham’s and had three matching numbers within the licence plate.
Packham’s response? “My girl, I suppose it’s one risk… I’m afraid I do not know. I didn’t put that situation. I actually do not know. I can not speculate. I do not need to.” He says the car idea is “fantasy” and the similarities are a coincidence.
2) Murdered by her husband
Packham discovered himself “in a decent spot resulting from your lengthy working affair with Witness x and your spouse’s obvious nonetheless upsetness [sic] about your steady disclosures about your infidelity”.
Between the night of February 21 and the morning of February 22, he hit his spouse with an unknown weapon, most likely first on her jaw which incapacitated her after which a deadly second blow to the top.
She was probably even attacked when she was already in her automobile within the storage heading to work. Having dealt with the homicide weapon, blood droplets within the storage might have come from Packham’s fingers or the weapon. He strikes his spouse’s physique.
Packham does not exit of his strategy to report her lacking and does not need assist on the lookout for her as he is aware of all alongside the place she and her automobile are. He drives round, both in her automobile or his automobile, on the lookout for locations to get rid of the weapon, his spouse’s telephone and purse, and her car licence plates.
He cries and sounds distressed throughout telephone calls together with his sister and daughters. He realises he must account for his whereabouts as his principal telephone was switched off within the morning so he telephones a colleague to conform to lie for him about being at a piece assembly.
However then media experiences about Packham floor and he’s offended as a result of it seems to forged doubt on his actions. He tells those who he was on the lookout for a brand new car for his spouse that morning and he did not need her to trace him on his telephone.
After being noticed within the BMW by a witness throughout the day, he leaves the car at Diep River practice station.
He has dinner together with his sister in Tokai from round 19:00 to 21:17. Round 21:30, he units the BMW alight on the location he most likely left it earlier that day, pondering it can destroy all proof and his spouse “would merely change into one other statistic of a hijacking”.
When the investigating officer telephones late on the day to satisfy with Packham, he says he’s too drained however reschedules for the subsequent morning, an appointment he misses. “In impact, Mr Packham, I’m going to argue that you simply killed your spouse and set the car alight.”
Packham’s response? “I categorically denied what the prosecutor has simply stated”. He says that is nothing greater than hypothesis and maintains he’s harmless.
Closing arguments shall be offered on April 24.