All language subtitles for the.jury.death.on.the.staircase.s01e03.1080p.hdtv.h264-cbfm_track4_[eng]

Hello!

What did you see
when you walked inside?

I found him sitting down
with the body, screaming.

Shaun was hysterical.

He was out of himself.

Hey, what happened
this morning?

We had a fight.

How did he die?

That's not our job to find out.

Our job is to listen to the evidence.

Did you see a laceration
to the deceased's right chin area?

Yes, I did.

I examined a silver component
of the fruit juicer.

- With what appears
to be blood staining?
- Yes.

It was bigger and a bit heavier
than I expected it to be.

It could be used as a weapon.

It's like a big jigsaw,
and we're sort of being fed pieces.

Yeah, you really don't know
if he's feeling guilty

or if he's very sad.

Crying doesn't mean
you're sad or you're sorry.

I was making carrot juice
with the juicer,

and he just kept at me.

You're criticising me all morning.

My driving's shit.
You're always picking on me.

- What happened then?
- I don't...I don't remember.

I think Carlos has come up to him,
made a remark,

he's like, "Fuck this shit."

Bang.

When a person
is accused of a crime

it's often the job of a jury
to decide their fate.

But do juries always get it right?

To find out,
for the first time in Australia,

we're following a jury
through a criminal trial...

Shaun Yang did unlawfully kill
Carlo Levetto.

..with actors restaging
a real case, word for word.

He said to me that
the relationship was deteriorating

and he wanted to end it.

But, just as in a real court,
the jurors are everyday people.

- That was hard to watch, huh?
- Blimey.

We'll follow 12 jurors

as they work to decipher
a baffling criminal trial.

Down.

What they're saying is,
he was so angry

that then he grabbed him around
the throat just to finish him off.

And you're saying, "No, it can't
be Shaun. It can't be Shaun."

Well, who else was it, then?

Will the jury convict
an innocent man?

Guys, guys, guys,
it's five against one.

Or will they free one who is guilty?

We should just deliver 'not guilty',

just close this now.

The jurors reveal their strengths
and their prejudices.

I totally recognise
that I do have a bias.

Thou shalt not kill
really rings home.

I only had one opinion of criminals.

They're guilty. They're all liars.

Will our 12 jurors
arrive at the same verdict

as the original trial?

How say you? Is the accused
guilty, or not guilty?

- I swear by...
- Almighty God...

- That I will give a...
- True verdict...

According to the evidence.

It's day five
of the manslaughter trial.

Overnight, the jurors
have been thinking about

what it means to sit in judgement.

I am a good judge of character,

and I put that down to the fact

that I'm an only child.

And I think only children

sometimes grow up
with this superpower

because they're not distracted
by all the noise around them.

I don't make rash decisions.

I try and take things in context,
keep things very steady-Eddie

and try and make the best decision.

But there's always an element of me
that's a little bit suspicious.

I am very cautious and aware.

I can peg someone as good or bad
long before anybody else can.

I don't know what it is.
It's an intuitive thing.

People with different coloured eyes,
apparently, can see heaven and hell,

so right from wrong.

So we'll see if we can
test that theory.

When I'm faced with tough decisions,

it is very important
to remember who I am -

that I'm a religious man,

I abide by the Ten Commandments,

I've got these certain morals.

- Thank you.
- Thank you.

I think I've been quiet,
just listening.

Because there were
so many dominant voices,

I don't want to add another one.

Hello, hello.

- Morning.
- Good morning.

- Morning.
- Morning.

Try... Gonna try that.

I also need to make it
to your age, Rose.

You almost choked on
that croissant last time.

That's just my style.

I'll speak up
when I feel comfortable.

And that's not anyone's fault.

OK, can someone start calling out
some names for the witness list?

I think it'd be good
to have a visual

of who the witnesses were
under Carlo, who knew them both,

and then Shaun's,
when we get together,

and then we can kind of
stick it up there with Blu Tack

and just have a visual
as they add to them, do you think?

Sure.

- Can someone yell out some names?
- Uh, Clifford.

- Sorry?
- Clifford.

Clifford - both.

Mr and Mrs Gentile? Or shall we
put Mr Gentile in more for Carlo?

I'll tell you what my worry is,

is that absolutely everybody is
really nice and lovely and focused,

and there's nobody
that's really annoying.

And I fear the annoying one is me.

Sorry, Mish. Say again -
what do we...what do we...?

- How are we...?
- Why are there...? Hang on.

Why are they exactly separated
in this...like this?

'Cause we don't have
Shaun's witness list yet.

So we're just kind of getting
a visual of who Carlo has...

..like, who the prosecution
has as defence.

So, we've got ambo, who are...
the police officers.

We've got people
who know them both -

Clifford, Mr and Mrs Gentile.

But do we say Mr Gentile
is more Carlo, or both?

Well, I don't understand
what the point is of this.

I'm just doing this
for a visual thing for me.

So if you guys don't want it, I can
just write it and just stick it up.

It's all good.

I just struggle with it
because, for me,

it doesn't help knowing if...

It's not, like,
one against the other,

if that makes sense -
in my mind, at least.

And some of the witnesses,
like an ambulance and the police,

like, it doesn't fit in either
of these three categories.

Yeah, OK. I'll just do it
on my list, then.

- Yeah. I don't know.
- That's all cool.

- Mish, I think it's...
- Yeah?

- Instead of allocating them...
- That's cool.

I will just do it on my own
little thing. That's all fine.

It's all good. Carry on.

Carry on. It's all good.

As was the case
in the original trial,

the judge will present the jurors
with surprise evidence.

To view it, they will need
to leave the court.

Today we will be conducting
an out-of-court inspection,

so that you, the jurors, can go and
see the house where Mr Levetto died.

What you observe
during the inspection

is to be treated by you
as part of the overall evidence

you must consider in your verdict.

Be extremely careful
about drawing any inference

where proof is required
beyond reasonable doubt.

Thank you very much.

In serious cases
of murder and manslaughter,

it's not uncommon that the jury
will be taken to the crime scene,

if the crime scene
is in the same condition

it was at the time of the crime.

This can be so helpful for jurors.

It gives them the context they need
to understand the facts of the case

so much more than a one-dimensional
photograph can tell them.

I can't wait to see how it unfolds.

For this excursion,
the only thing I expect to happen

is to get a better sense of the
stairs and the layout of the place.

Hopefully,
it will give some answers,

it will put some pieces

into the right order.

Let's do it.

Please follow me,
members of the jury.

The jurors inspect the
property under the watch of the judge

and Detective Bennett,

who inspected the scene
on the day of Carlo's death.

We'll go into the kitchen area,
and I'll indicate specific details

regarding the investigation
into his death.

The metal juicer was here.

The jug was here.

The compost bin was just here.

The photos you've been issued showed
a section of beam that was damaged.

That broken section was just here.

The metal component to the juicer
was located here.

The deceased was laying with
his feet here and his head here.

There was a blood smear
on the wall here,

spatter on the floor here,

blood smear on the banister,
just here.

We have 15 minutes for you to
have an inspection in those areas.

Take as many notes as you can.
15 minutes.

Thank you very much,
ladies and gentlemen.

And the carrot's been found
inside there, yeah?

Yeah.

I mean, this is so wildly different

from what I was
imagining in my head.

Mm. Yeah.

Like, this beam,
I thought was in the kitchen.

OK.

It's so easy to speculate

when you're on the scene
of a potential crime

to say "this could have happened".

I can already see people
looking at the beam

and then looking at
the sink and the stairs,

and it's just going to turn into

a melting pot of conspiracy
theory-ing and...and speculation.

Maybe he got to here and lost his
balance at the top, and kept going.

It's not safe. I don't think it's
safe, especially for older people.

Do I think he fell?

It is a possibility.

But, um...

Yeah.

Being in the actual house,

I'll see whether I got
the visualisation right.

Like, I'm gonna ask, "Hey,
can you be Carlo? I'll be Shaun,"

or, "Can you be Shaun?
I'll be Carlo.

"And let's act it out.
This is what happened."

I smack you once, maybe twice.

A couple of times. One...

- Once.
- And again.

- Once.
- Yeah.

And then you stumble back.

His head was bleeding.

The altercation happened...

It started there and moved
all along, and we ended up there.

- Yeah.
- About here.

- One, two...
- See you later.

- Down.
- Down.

- Yeah.
- Yeah.

That's what's happened. For sure.

It feels like we're now going into
a crime investigating squad,

trying to find out what happened,

as opposed to answering
the ultimate question -

if Shaun is guilty.

- Is he...is he exactly your height?
- He's exactly my height.

- To the centimetre?
- He's exactly my size.

Do you want me to lie down?

- Where do you think his head was?
- About there.

- We know that. We know, right?
- Yeah. He ended up here.

Right here.

Could've I fallen down the stairs
and ended up in this position?

That's what I was trying
to just think.

That's a strange place to fall dead.

In terms of being able to visualise
what they were talking about,

it made things clearer.

Didn't add any clarity whatsoever
to what happened.

Nothing becomes black and white
at any point of it.

It remains...defiantly grey area.

I wonder if I'm ever going to watch
another cop show ever again,

because it's just nothing like it.

Being in there, it just
became so real and human for me.

It makes me think very differently.

I didn't expect
to feel such emotion.

They bought a house together.

I mean, there was
a four-year relationship.

There was a big age gap,

but I kind of viewed it as
quite a beautiful thing.

Thank you. See you in the courtroom.
Thank you.

- See you in...
- See you in the court, Your Honour.

See you in court.

You know, it's easy to paint someone
as a villain and believe that

without taking into consideration
a broader context.

I'm not convinced
that he, you know, killed him

or had intent to harm his partner.

To be honest with you,
I'm leaning towards not guilty.

But it's too early for me to make
that judgement confidently.

- I'm glad I saw the stairs.
- Mmm.

That was even tripping me out,
going down them.

I don't like those stairs.

That's interesting, because
I have had the opposite thought now.

Like, I don't find the stairs
as scary as I thought they were.

I just... I'm not saying that he
fell down the stairs or whatever,

but...like,
we can't rule it out yet.

- I'm so glad we went.
- Mm.

Surprisingly, the length
of that thoroughfare

- was longer than what I expected.
- Yes.

I mean, all the action so far is
between the kitchen and the stairs.

- Yeah?
- Mm.

My God, this just drives me nuts.

I mean, why would that
particular part of the juicer

be completely away from the kitchen?

Well, if it was being used
as a weapon.

Do you think Carlos was hit
on the head by the juicer

with intention by Shaun?

- I can't say.
- We can't rule out an attack, can we?

I haven't got evidence enough
to say that he did.

I do hope that we get more.

Oh, I'll be paying attention
for the next session.

The prosecutor

now prepares to present
his most important evidence yet.

As much as we have been speculating
about what happened,

we don't have any evidence

to support any of our theories
or suppositions.

We're looking forward to
more medical evidence

and perhaps more evidence
from the coroner's report.

The prosecution case rests
on evidence of a physical fight.

Your Honour, the Crown calls
Sandra Fisher.

Many scientific experts
work on a homicide case.

The prosecution begins with

the doctor who studied
Shaun's injuries in custody.

For the purpose
of the investigation,

the male person in custody

was required to undergo certain
intimate forensic procedures.

- Correct?
- Correct.

Can you please take a look
at these photographs?

Exhibit H.

There's a scratch on the back
of Mr Yang, is there not?

Yes.

And photograph 8 and 9 -

what did these show?

Is what is described as a bruise.

And, Doctor, in your notes, do
you describe it as something else?

I...without being racist,
described it as a Chinese burn.

Chinese burn?

One hand screwing the skin one way,

the other hand
screwing it the other way.

And it's just what it looked like.

So in relation to the police
in this matter,

they had to place handcuffs
on Mr Yang

because of his distressed state.

Stay there. Stop resisting.

Typically,
injuries caused by handcuffs,

are they similar to Chinese burns
or not?

No, they're not.

The process of putting handcuffs on
would not have caused that mark.

So if there was a struggle between
the deceased and the accused,

could that have caused
the Chinese burn?

It could have.

Thank you, Doctor.
I have no further questions.

It's now the defence's turn
to cross-examine the doctor.

So, far as any injuries
to the torso -

that is, from the pelvic area
to the neck -

any injuries beyond superficial
or minor marks?

There were none.

Right. Did you observe his back
from the neck to the waist?

I did.

And do we glean that he had any
significant injury or lesion

on his back?

I only found a slight scratch.

The injury
that particularly drew my eye

when I saw the person in custody
was the right wrist.

The Chinese burn.

The Chinese burn
attracted me straightaway.

It appeared to me
to be most definitely recent,

and it appeared to me
to be an unusual mark.

Are we able to determine

what degree of force
was applied to this man's wrist

to cause the Chinese burn, or marks?

In physical units of pounds
per square inch or whatever, no,

I can't, but I know from having had
one of these as a child at school

and from having seen them
on other people,

it requires a fair amount
of twisting.

It is impossible to reproduce
with any precision

the degree of force
that would have been employed,

except that it must have
been sufficient

to cause the marks on his wrist.

You are suggesting to me
that I agree with you

that the marks
were caused on his wrist

at the time of his restraint
and arrest.

I cannot tell you that.

Alright.

No further questions, Your Honour.

Dr Fisher, thank you
for attending today.

You may now leave the stand.

She was quite strong
that was a Chinese burn.

It had to have been done
by one person.

But then...his previous partner,

who said, "Yes, he's got
this skin condition

"which marks really easily."

And, you know, then there were
the two policemen

struggling with him
to get the cuffs on.

So that could all be
sort of turned upside down.

So, I'm wondering whether
that's entirely reliable.

Day five of the
manslaughter trial continues.

Next to be called by the prosecution

is the DNA analyst
who studied the alleged weapon.

Do you swear by Almighty God
that the evidence you shall give

will be the truth,

the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?

If so, please say I do.

I do.

Your name is Frida Anne Martin,
is it not?

Yes.

And you're an expert in DNA.
Is that right?

Yes. That's correct.

Was Carlo Levetto's DNA profile
the same DNA profile

as the DNA recovered from
the spout of the juice extractor?

Yes.

Could the witness please be provided
with exhibit C?

And could you please
point on the juicer

to the area
where you took the DNA profile from?

Yes, that is here.

It was here on the top side there
of the spout.

There are some photos here

which have been taken
of the juice extractor.

Exhibit A.

Are you able to say
whether that looks like blood?

It's red.

Red indicates that it's blood.

And then it turns red-brown
with age.

The partial DNA profile recovered
there was of Carlo Levetto. Correct?

It matched the profile of
Carlo Levetto.

Carlo Levetto's blood,
it would suggest.

Yes. It is consistent
with his profile.

That profile is expected to occur
in fewer than 1 in 10 billion people

in the general population.

- Right. So that's a strong match.
- Yes.

The prints of Mr Yang were found
on the juice extractor.

Yes. A print matching the top
of Mr Yang's right index finger

was identified.

The DNA evidence
has one more surprise to reveal.

And so DNA recovered from one
of the fingernail clippings

from Carlo Levetto,

that's a mixture that appears
to have originated

from two male individuals?

Yes.

The major profile is consistent
with originating from Carlo Levetto,

and the other DNA profile
was unknown.

- Is that right?
- Yes.

Now, there was DNA present
from more than two males,

and there was DNA
in larger amounts than others.

And the DNA
that was in larger amounts

could not have originated
from Shaun Yang,

because his type was different.

There's this DNA
that's turned up that nobody knows.

They haven't identified who it is.

So is there a third person?

That's what I'm curious to know.
Is there a third person?

The defence now seizes
the opportunity to cast doubt

on the forensic evidence.

In relation to Mr Yang,

was there any foreign human DNA
under his fingernails?

No. There wasn't actually
even enough to do a test.

In relation to the juicer,

was there any human blood
tested by you on the juicer?

I could not establish any human
blood present on the juicer.

So far as the tests are concerned,

you have been testing things
in this case for almost two years.

With all the equipment that you have

and all of the tests
that you've done,

you have been unable to find
any blood on this object at all?

On the metal juice extractor.
That's correct.

Using all the equipment
that you had. Correct?

Yes.

I know that there's DNA present,

but DNA comes in a lot of
different bodily fluids.

Can we just cut to the chase?

Did you find any blood
on the juicer?

No.

Thank you.

No further questions.

Now it's even more confusing,

because they've got no trace
whatsoever of Shaun's blood type DNA

or whatever on any of their...

What I...what I can't understand

is these are people
that studied the law.

They study fingernails,
they'd zip dead bodies around,

and they can't come to a conclusion.

Thank you.

At the end, I mean, even now,

I feel like...I wonder really
what really happened.

I still don't know what happened.

The jury
don't decide what happened.

They've got to base it solely
on the information

that's given to them
in that courtroom.

And that can be tremendously
frustrating to jurors

who want to know what happened.

When the DNA came back
from Carlos's fingernails,

there was somebody else's.

- Yeah.
- It wasn't Shaun's.

It's another person,
but they don't know who.

# Bum-bum-bum-bum. #

How would you get someone else's DNA
under your thumb?

He's rubbing up against somebody,

giving them a back scratch
or something?

Giving a little...

You know?

Maybe Carlo was having an affair

with the guy that was renovating
the place, and he got caught.

And that's his... ..DNA
that's under his fingernails.

Don't you think it's weird
that Shaun didn't have Carlo's DNA

under HIS fingernails?

If it was a fistfight,
there would have been...

- ..you would have thought...
- You'd think so.

- Unless he's washed his hands.
- ..they would have both
had their DNA.

It doesn't look like
he washed anything.

But when you have a fight, you don't
fight under your fingernails.

Well, if they're saying
that he's got these...

..these grab marks around
or scratches, his...

..his DNA would be
under his fingernails.

- Yes.
- For sure.

- And it's not.
- Unless he...

Unless he scrubbed.

I mean, it's interesting that there
was no DNA under Shaun's fingernails.

- Yeah, none. Except for his own.
- None.

It's getting juicy.

What about the juicer?
So, they're saying...

That...that wasn't planned.

Perfect segue.

- The juicer.
- I wasn't timing that.

Knowing that Shaun's DNA is not
found in Carlo's fingernails,

um...yeah, it's very confusing.

So, there was a kerfuffle.
There was a fight.

- An altercation.
- Yes.

So... Yeah, but then it was
bang, bang.

And for me, the Chinese burn
is another proof,

another evidence
that Carlo grabbed Shaun's wrist

and did this to make the burn.

Maybe Shaun was attempting...

Have you ever tried to do
a Chinese burn with one hand?

No, it's definitely...
No, I don't know.

- You can't do it.
- I haven't...

- Can you?
- No. You've got to use two.

Yeah. That's what they were saying.

So that means two hands
were on Shaun's right...

Like, Carlo's... Yeah.

It's a really awkward spot.

Does it take two hands
or one to do that?

Chinese burn, like that.

Didn't they say the Chinese burn
was like...would be a self-defence?

- Yeah.
- Which I found interesting.

- Yeah.
- My initial thing,

I thought it was something to do
with their intimate life.

Yeah, it could be. Exactly. Yeah.

Maybe they're into -
what's it called? - S&M.

Maybe that explains
all the bruises on them.

I haven't got to see in the bedroom,

so...could be whips and chains
and everything in there.

I don't... Like...

Yeah, I don't know
what they're up to.

When I first saw
those Chinese burns, I...

..my immediate thought
was that he'd been tied up.

That's what I thought.

They could have been, like,
sexual play.

Like, there was nothing there
that said those bruises

were done in that time,
fresh that morning.

And, you know,
whatever floats your boat.

I struggle to actually
put them, too, in action

because there is two people,

one doing one thing,
another doing another thing,

and I struggle to put it together.

Yeah? I seem to have usually
a good imagination,

but it's just...I just can't put them
together in the same sort of...

- Together. Yeah. It's hard.
- Yeah.

Good afternoon, members of the jury.

I just wanted to let you know that's
the end of our court day for today.

Thank you so much for all
of your hard work today, guys.

Everybody's personal experience
affect how they judge other people,

without a doubt.

I don't think it's avoidable.
It's unavoidable. Yeah.

People come in this experience
from very different backgrounds,

and they are also just a product
of what happened to them in the past

and who gave birth to them
and how they were treated.

My dad was actually murdered
when I was 10.

Nobody was ever charged with it.

Yeah, nobody ever was found.

I don't think I was able
to process what it was for me,

grieving my dad.

It's not like I'm looking
for retribution,

it's not going to change anything.

But, um, maybe I'm projecting
my grief towards the case.

We all want to belong, yeah?

We want to kind of cling to
people who are like us.

And we feel safe in those,

and we feel unsafe where people
are not quite like us.

If I end up in a position
where my decision on the verdict

is differ from the majority,
I would...I would be nervous.

I would be worried about being maybe
bullied to the other side perhaps.

But also I would be concerned
for the outcome of the case.

It's the last day of
the Crown prosecutor's case.

Mr Crown, are you ready
to call your next witness?

Yes, Your Honour. The Crown
calls Dr Ben Palhassar.

Strategically, he's left his star
expert witness to last,

the pathologist who examined
Carlo's body.

I was really looking forward
to hearing from

the post-mortem, the autopsy.

So today was very important,
you know.

If the prosecutor can't remove doubt
from the minds of the jurors

today, his case will be lost.

So, in relation to this matter,
you performed an autopsy

on the deceased Carlo Levetto
on 14 March 2022.

That is correct.

I have identified a total
of 14 specific injuries.

In plain terms, autopsy findings
included tears over the skin

of the right side of the chin,
a band of bruising situated

over the right and front side of
the neck, bruises to the left back

and hip region and multiple bruises
under the skin of the right arm,

left forearm, right wrist
and knuckles of both hands.

The bones of the spinal cord
and neck were looked at to exclude

any breaks or other abnormalities,
and there was nothing

abnormal found there.

The heart weighed about 450g,
which is enlarged,

not massively enlarged.

There was nothing to suggest a heart
attack or any other abnormality

of the heart itself that would
otherwise explain the death.

The prosecution must link
Carlo's death

directly to Shaun's actions,
discounting any other possibilities.

So, now, in relation to
those injuries, Doctor,

can you indicate whether
they were consistent,

firstly, with a fall
down the stairs?

It is conceivable, but very
unlikely, that those injuries

would be explained by
a fall down the stairs.

If indeed someone fell from the top
steps down to the bottom,

would you expect more injuries
consistent with that

than what you saw on this body?

Yes, you would expect more injuries
over the areas more likely to

come into contact with
either the steps

or other structures
on the way down.

The prosecution now suggests
a violent physical attack.

Can you indicate to the jury
what signs there are for you

that death has occurred
by strangulation?

If you look at the majority
of cases, we know manual

strangulation will cause breaks
of either the cartilages

or bones of the neck.

We looked to see if there was any
damage to the lining of the blood

vessels in the neck,
and there was none evident there.

We looked at the other cartilages
that make up the voice box

and found no breaks or other damage.

So, stopping you there, Doctor,
if indeed the deceased was lying

on the ground and the accused
is strangling him,

would that be consistent with
the bruising

that you've seen on the neck?

That would certainly be
an explanation for it.

There are some cases where almost
none of these findings were there,

yet it's known that strangulation
has occurred.

The Crown prosecutor now moves
on to the alleged weapon.

Can we please share Exhibit C
with the witness?

Alright, so, what I want to
ask you is this -

the wound that you saw
on this man's chin,

is that consistent with being struck
by the spout of this juicer?

Yes.

These surfaces could result
in that sort of injury.

And would you agree that the wound
itself may have been the result

of one or more than one blow
to the same area?

Yes, yes.

Finally, the most anticipated
question of all.

The mystery that has confounded the
jurors since day one of the trial.

You have a direct cause of death
in this case, do you not?

In my opinion, the
direct cause of death

was blunt-force
head and neck injury.

Thank you. No further questions.

It's now the defence's last
opportunity to blast holes

in the prosecution's evidence.

His heart obviously stopped
beating, and he died.

But why couldn't he have
just had a heart attack,

smashed his head on the ground,

or even hit his chin on the stair
or the handrail?

If he had had a heart attack,
I would have expected to see either

more narrowing of the arteries
or damage to the heart muscle.

It is true, however, an irregularity
of heartbeat can occur

and not show any features.

The bloodied chin,
that in and of itself,

the blow wouldn't have
killed him, would it?

In most cases, no,
you would not expect it to.

Did that kill the deceased?
The blow to the head?

I can't say with certainty
that it did.

I can say it certainly is
potentially fatal,

but I can't give you the assurance
that it was that alone

and not necessarily in conjunction
with the neck injuries.

The bruising on the chest,

if you are a lay person
and you are indulging in a frenzied

attempt to resuscitate someone
by shaking them

and pressing hard on their chest,
does that leave bruising?

Yes, it can.

The location is not typical
for resuscitation,

but if one were placing the fingers
and the hands up on the high chest,

on the neck, yes, that could be
an explanation for bruising.

What degree of force is generally
used by professionals

who try and resuscitate
a person properly?

Is it of some significance,
sometimes?

Yes.

In fact, it is sometimes so severe
enough to actually break bones.

- Break ribs?
- Yes.

If you don't apply enough pressure
to actually compress the chest,

there's no point in using
resuscitation, so yes.

And by its very nature,
it can cause bruising.

Yes.

Frequently associated with bruising
over the front of the breastbone.

Is there any other injury
and any other area

that you would wish to comment on?

I am unable to say that I have ever
seen a case of a natural death

with such extensive injuries
involving the neck and the head.

I cannot say with certainty
whether it is the head injury alone,

the neck injury alone,
or a combination of both.

It is most likely to be
a combination of both.

But it does include the combination
of falling down the stairs

and misguided resuscitation?

It would be an extraordinary fall
to result in that degree of injury

and it would be an extraordinary
degree of misguided resuscitation,

but I can't exclude that
combination might explain

the injuries that we have seen.

Thank you. No further questions.

There's 14 injuries now.

And so it confirms my theory

that Shaun struck him not just once,

but there were several blows,
like two blows or three blows.

I just felt sorry for Carlo.

I want to be a good Samaritan.
He died.

So the Christian in me is thinking
there needs to be justice,

he's been bashed.

Put him away.

After a challenging session
in court,

the jurors try to make sense of
the confounding medical evidence.

Ay-ay-ay-ay, that's what we wanted.

Some pathology reports.

That's good.

- That was probably the most...
- Intense.

- Intense.
- Mm.

Oh, my God, so much information.

They started talking about
strangulation.

Mm-hm.

But did they say definitely
that it wasn't?

- What...
- Inconclusive.

It could or couldn't.

Does that mean it's
beyond reasonable doubt.

Mm.

No, it's actually definition
of "reasonable doubt".

Inconclusive is reasonable doubt.

Exactly.

I mean, so the facts that we have
are the injuries, basically.

What was the cause
is what we still don't know.

- Yeah.
- That's why we're here.

Mm-hm.

People's lives do go into play,
I think,

when they're asked to make
a judgement in a jury setting.

I just did a recent, uh,
CPR course recently.

That's not consistent
with a downward pressure.

For me, it's like a cat scratch.

I've received hickeys
and I've given hickeys,

and they are not hickeys.

I don't think we need
a factual response there.

They are not.
I've been trained in martial arts.

- This is with an object, right?
- It's direct, bang. Yeah.

Van did martial arts,

so then he was saying that the
14 or so injuries on the body

are very much from
applications of force,

but I don't know if I trust that,
because that seems very conclusive.

Those are blows from Shaun to Carlo.

- Are you're saying no, they're not?
- No, no, no, I'm not.

No, no, no, I'm not saying
that they're not.

The reason why I don't want
to answer your question,

in terms of what you're saying, is
that he received 14 deliberate blows,

is because if in answering
that question, what you're saying,

have you reached a verdict?

Well, for me, it's just
thinking, "What would Jesus do?"

There's the Ten Commandments.
Thou shalt not kill.

And I think for me, it's
like "thou shalt not kill"

really rings home,
and somebody was killed.

Being a Catholic, I lean towards
those beliefs and those morals.

I pray for wisdom.

I ask God with whatever decision
I make, open my heart

and make sure that it's the truth.

Because I realise that
we're only human.

I've made mistakes and I don't want
to make many more mistakes,

especially in this instance.

There's this person who's counting
on me to make the right decision.

I want to do right.

Fingers crossed.
I have a feeling, as well.

I would love to know.

Before returning
to the courtroom,

the jurors still have questions
about Carlo's cause of death.

The juicer.

- Oh. Oh.
- Oh, hello.

They have requested
a viewing of the juicer

to understand how it could be used
as a potential weapon.

Feel free to handle it
and have a really good look.

As it's an active piece of evidence,

you're not allowed to open it, slice
the bag, or anything like that.

This is a copy of the exact juicer.

Feel free to pull it apart,
see how it works,

those types of things.

Thank you.

But...

But that wasn't
conclusive blood, was it?

No. They could not confirm
that that was blood.

So, just try and hold that
with your right index finger

on that fingerprint.

OK, I don't have a good grip
of that like that.

- No.
- That's a flimsy for me.

It's very weird.

Does that kill someone?
Like, a juicer?

Like, is that a murder weapon?

Like, I mean, or maybe manslaughter
weapon? I don't know. It's crazy.

What do you reckon? You reckon
it's possible? That juicer?

- What?
- The juicer.

That it would...
it would cut him like that?

- For sure. It's possible, yeah.
- Yeah. Yeah.

On the weekend I went to visit
my mother-in-law,

and her machine went rogue
and smoked up and went crazy.

It was the blender, her blender.

And it was a Sunbeam blender,
I think.

Just saying. I went crazy with an
idea, but it's not impossible.

And a dent here.

I don't think this dent
is related to the incident,

because how would it get there?

- Because it's inside.
- But his DNA was found on the dent.

- On the dent?
- Mm, in the report.

- I reckon...
- Whose? Carlo's?

- Yeah, Carlo's DNA.
- Yes, it was found on the dent.

With Shaun's mental condition,
maybe he just...

- Snapped.
- Snapped, yeah.

Just snapped.
He did not plan to cause him...

- No. No, of course not.
- Yeah.

- It just happened.
- Yes, I agree. 100%.

Mm.

So, the cause of death was
blunt-force to the head,

which pretty much consistent
with falling on the floor, right?

So he hit the floor,
and he died because of that?

Yes. But what caused the fall?

Um...we don't know.

- What a mind fuck this is, guys.
- Tell me about it.

It's like I'm on Pluto.

I'm now in the belief
that he was whacked.

- In the back of the head.
- At the back of the head.

So, why do I say that?

Because I've had a similar incident
that I haven't told the group yet,

that I've been whacked in
the head in a separate...

- With?
- Well, with a steel pole.

With a steel pole.
I had three gashes.

No-one's gone through a bashing
like I have.

Like, no-one's been mugged
like I have.

No-one's been hit on the head
six, seven times.

No, I've got 10 stitches.

Uh, no-one else has
experienced that,

so I've got to stick up,
like, Carlo was bashed.

Based on my experience, there was
a blow to the head that way,

and there was a blow to
the head back.

Why? Because there's a red line
at the back

that's similar to my red incision.

I've got three gashes on my head.
You can feel it right here.

- Feel that?
- Mm.

- Feel that?
- Mm, technically, yeah.

Yeah, that's one of three.

Good afternoon, everybody.

We are heading off to court now,
please.

If you'd all like to
grab your notepads.

It is interesting though, like,
listening, because of your, like...

- Experience.
- Experience.

No-one else has been mugged.

- Yeah.
- Yeah.

So, I know what it feels
like to be...

And the doctor said,
"You could have died."

Mm.

Now the prosecution
case has ended,

the judge has a surprise
twist for the jury.

So, members of the jury, now that
the Crown has concluded his case,

it is open to you as
the sole judges of the facts

that you tell me that the evidence
that you have heard is insufficient

for you to be satisfied that
the act or acts caused the death

of Carlo Levetto, and that you wish
to bring in a verdict of not guilty

without hearing anything more.

If, after hearing the prosecution's
case, the jurors are still doubtful

of Shaun's guilt, they can deliver
an early verdict of not guilty,

the trial is cut short
and everyone can go home.

It is not enough that
you hold a suspicion

that the accused committed an act
that caused the death,

you must be satisfied
beyond reasonable doubt.

I would now ask you to retire,
to consider what I've put to you.

Thank you.

The jurors' decision
needs to be unanimous.

If they don't all agree,
the trial continues.

Ooh.

Ay-ay-ay.

Is anybody else blown away
completely with this development?

Are we supposed to actually
think that this is,

well, this is what prosecution
has done and their job is done?

We're supposed to have no doubt?

- No doubt.
- No doubt?

- Should we take a vote?
- Yeah, is there anyone...

Who wants to hear more evidence?

Guy's job as jury
foreperson now begins.

To assist the deliberation process

and then to deliver the verdict
to the judge.

He's got to convince us beyond
reasonable doubt that he's guilty.

That's right.

And if he hasn't, inadvertently
that means you're saying he's not.

- So, he didn't convince us.
- Yeah.

- Yeah.
- Not even near reasonable doubt.

- No. That's right, yeah.
- Not at all.

So, technically,
because that's the case,

like, all we have
is reasonable doubt.

We can say, "Hey, based on
what we have seen so far,

"he is not guilty."

If people now are
at the stage of going,

"He's not convinced me
at all..."

- No.
- Right, and never will,

then you can say now,
"OK, we can say he's not guilty."

He never will because his part
is done, finished, right?

His part is finished.
So he never will, right?

Any more evidence will be coming
from defence rather than prosecutor.

They have not convinced me
that he's guilty whatsoever.

I don't believe he caused
Carlo's death.

I think he made a contribution,
but I don't think he killed him.

- But I'm not sure.
- Mm.

I mean, weirdly, seeing the house
and seeing everything else,

I mean, this morning, I suddenly
thought, "Actually, you know what?

"I think he could be guilty."

Shaun said, "I had a fight
with my friend," right?

And he's dead.

So, there's no doubt
there was a fight.

- Yeah.
- It doesn't matter who instigated it.

Doesn't matter what happened.

They got from the kitchen sink,
which is where Shaun was,

all the way to
the foot of the stairs.

So, suddenly this morning,
I was thinking,

"Fuck, you know what? It is guilty."

All I'm saying is, there's
enough doubt for me right now,

there's enough doubt that I can't
say one way or the other.

And I'm saying he could be
possibly guilty.

- Yeah, I can't possibly...I can't...
- Yeah, it is a possibility.

If there's a least three of us that
think that he's possibly guilty,

so that's not 12.

No, I don't think you...

Let's try it again.

What you're having,
is there reasonable doubt

that he might be guilty
or not guilty, right?

What prosecutor's supposed
to have done is

convince us beyond reasonable doubt.

- Yeah.
- So, you have reasonable doubt,
I have reasonable doubt.

We are not in separate camps,
we're in the same camp.

- We both have reasonable doubt.
- But...

Beyond reasonable doubt
can be taken differently

by every single person in that room.

Um, what's reasonable to me
is probably not reasonable for you.

If 12 of us and there's one
who says he's possibly guilty,

then we need to continue
with the trial.

No, Van, it doesn't work like that.
It's not like that.

- It's not that simple.
- No, no, no.

It just works in the opposite way.

Listen to me, he's saying
the Crown has convinced him

he's guilty of...

- No, no, he hasn't.
- That's not what he's saying at all.

I'm hanging for
that break to be...

Court Officer, if you can hear me,
I'd love the break.

Were there 14 falls, then?

You've got to have
absolutely no doubt.

After almost an hour,
the jurors are feeling the pressure.

I'm seriously starting
to get the shits

with half the people in there.

Fuck, I'm losing it.

- It was always going to get heated...
- I'm fucking losing it.

..when we're trying to
agree with each other now.

Yeah.

It's like going around in circles.

But at the end of the day,
there was two people in the room,

one person's dead.

I just want to make sure that what
we're doing is the correct thing.

Wasn't the whole point of this,

if we have been convinced,
then we go on,

but if we haven't,
then that is not guilty?

- Yeah, that's right.
- Yeah.

I just think it should be over,
shouldn't it?

Like, everyone has reasonable doubt,
no-one is convinced...

One way or the other?

And therefore, if you're not
past reasonable doubt,

- then you're not guilty.
- Then it's not guilty.

But already we've got one member
of the jury saying

could be possibly guilty.

- But he's not...
- That's not what he's saying.

I'm not saying that.

He's misunderstanding of
what's actually asked of him.

Who's misunderstanding?

I think Van's interpretation
of "possibly guilty"

is where we're kind of falling over.

I don't think Van's
misunderstanding, though.

- Thank you.
- Yeah.

He was being mocked
and he was being told

that he was misinterpreting things.

And I get protective when
someone's trying to speak.

Oh, my goodness, then
Mish came to save the day.

Just jumped at me and just goes,
"Rah!"

Every thought is valid.

Up until this really odd insertion
of this midterm verdict,

it felt so nice.

You know, my little world
was full of love.

It was just like, "Oh, my God,

"this is such a beautiful
group of people.

"Everybody getting on,
everything fantastic,

"Kumbaya and stuff."

Could any of us say,

"The prosecution hasn't convinced me,
he is absolutely not guilty?"

- Has he done his job?
- No.

If he hasn't, are we absolutely
saying,

"He is not guilty, finish the trial"?

If all 12 of us say yes,
OK, trial's finished.

If it's not guilty,
done and dusted for the day.

- That's right.
- Trial's over.

Yeah.

From what I'm hearing,
we should just deliver not guilty.

Just close this now, because
none of us are convinced

that he is guilty.

That's not true.

Next time, can
our jurors deliver justice?

It's like setting out,
sort of heading off together

with 11 other people on a nice
cruise, on a beautiful, sunny day,

and all of a sudden, you know,
you hit a storm

and you end up shipwrecked.

I'm not saying absolutely
he's not guilty,

but I'm not convinced
he's guilty yet.

No-one knows how to deal with it,
no-one knows which way to turn.

He could have ran into Shaun or
fallen, and it's not manslaughter.

- Right?
- That's accidental.

Is it accidental if somebody is
attacking you and you do that?

We don't know if even
he touched him.

You need to work as a team
to get off this desert island

without becoming cannibals.

Mr Foreperson, what is
the decision of the jury?

The jury's still out.

Captions by Red Bee Media
SBS Australia 2024