Fiery exchanges in Lundy retrial

Both sets of lawyers in Mark Lundy’s retrial have set about trying to discredit each other’s cases, with allegations of scene contamination and ‘‘rank speculation’’ by expert witnesses.

In scenes that sometimes became fiery yesterday, Crown prosecutor Philip Morgan and defence lawyer David Hislop tried to cast doubt on the testimony of forensic experts called by each side.

Both gave evidence on the scene that greeted police on August 30, 2000 – the beaten bodies of Christine and Amber Lundy lying dead in their home.

It was the start of week four of the trial in the High Court at Wellington, with ESR scientist Bjorn Sutherland taking the stand for a fourth day.

Hislop quizzed him about aspects of the scene: the difficulty of moving Christine Lundy’s 111-kilogram body from the scene; the potential for people who went near Amber picking up body tissue from Christine; and whether paint flecks found by the bodies could have come from somewhere other than the murder weapon.

Sutherland answered the queries with varying degrees of certainty: he could not recall moving the body 15 years ago; people who touched Amber probably did not get pieces of Christine on them; paint flecks could have come from elsewhere.

The first witness called by the defence was Gillian Leak, a crime scene and blood splatter expert from England. She spent much of her time on the stand responding to questions put to her by Hislop.

He asked could paint flecks spread around the bodies have been put there by something other than the murder weapon?

‘‘I cannot rule it out,’’ Leak said.

Morgan got 38 minutes at the end of the day to cross-examine Leak, during which he made her admit she had only come up with an alternative theory about the paint flecks last Wednesday. He said her theories were ‘‘rank speculation’’.

She said they were as much speculation as the Crown saying the flecks were put there by the murder weapon, which has never been found.

The trial continues.