This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . The next check for changes will be
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/oct/31/emma-lovell-home-invasion-teen-found-not-guilty-murder-north-lakes-brisbane-ntwnfb
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Teen found not guilty of murdering Emma Lovell in Brisbane home invasion | Teen found not guilty of murdering Emma Lovell in Brisbane home invasion |
| (32 minutes later) | |
| The 18-year-old male was found guilty of burglary and assault occasioning bodily harm by a Queensland judge | The 18-year-old male was found guilty of burglary and assault occasioning bodily harm by a Queensland judge |
| A teenager who broke into the home of Emma Lovell, alongside another teen who stabbed her to death, has been found not guilty of murder in a case that shocked Queensland in December 2022. | A teenager who broke into the home of Emma Lovell, alongside another teen who stabbed her to death, has been found not guilty of murder in a case that shocked Queensland in December 2022. |
| In a Brisbane court on Thursday, the now 18-year-old – who cannot be named for legal reasons as he was 17 on the night Lovell was killed – was also found not guilty of manslaughter and not guilty of malicious act with intent. | |
| He was found guilty of one count of burglary by break in the night in company, and one count of assault occasioning bodily harm in company. | |
| Lovell was murdered by the teenager’s companion on the lawn outside her North Lakes home, north of Brisbane’s CBD, on 27 December 2022. | Lovell was murdered by the teenager’s companion on the lawn outside her North Lakes home, north of Brisbane’s CBD, on 27 December 2022. |
| Her husband, Lee Lovell, was also stabbed twice in the back and kicked in the head in the attempted robbery. | |
| The teenager is being remanded in custody while a pre-sentencing report is prepared by the Queensland youth justice department and will be sentenced by Justice Michael Copley on 4 December. | The teenager is being remanded in custody while a pre-sentencing report is prepared by the Queensland youth justice department and will be sentenced by Justice Michael Copley on 4 December. |
| Last month he pleaded not guilty to four charges, including murder and assault occasioning bodily harm. | Last month he pleaded not guilty to four charges, including murder and assault occasioning bodily harm. |
| Due to the high-profile nature of the case, the murder trial was held before a judge rather than a jury, with Justice Copley alone determining the man’s fate. | Due to the high-profile nature of the case, the murder trial was held before a judge rather than a jury, with Justice Copley alone determining the man’s fate. |
| In May, his accomplice in the home invasion, was found guilty and sentenced to 14 years in prison for the “particularly heinous” murder of Emma Lovell in Brisbane in 2022. He was 17 at the time of the murder. | In May, his accomplice in the home invasion, was found guilty and sentenced to 14 years in prison for the “particularly heinous” murder of Emma Lovell in Brisbane in 2022. He was 17 at the time of the murder. |
| No reasons have yet been given for the latest verdict. | |
| However, during the trial last month, the defence barrister Laura Reece argued that CCTV footage did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that her client knew his companion was carrying a knife throughout the evening in which they roamed the streets of Brisbane’s outer northern suburbs with at least two others. | |
| Crown prosecutor David Nardone himself had conceded a murder conviction rested entirely upon the fact that the accused knew his companion was armed. | |
| He told the court that CCTV footage showed it was “unavoidable” that the accused saw his companion’s blade and, given the two teenagers had already formed a common purpose to steal from the Lovell home, he was therefore “jointly liable for possession of the knife”. | |
| But Reece argued during the trial that the infrared footage used as evidence against her client, did not show him looking in the direction of the blade held by his companion and did not accurately reflect the gloom in the Lovell’s doorwell. | |
| She also argued that, even if he did know his companion was armed, audio and video captured of the violent melee showed her client exhorting him to stop his violence and flee the scene. |