Defence Argues Evidence Indicates 'Another Killer' in Natalie McNally Murder Case
During closing submissions at Belfast Crown Court, defence barrister John Kearney KC asserted that the evidence presented in the trial of Stephen McCullagh, accused of murdering Natalie McNally, points toward "some other killer" rather than the defendant. Kearney emphasised that the prosecution's case is "dependent upon circumstantial evidence", lacking direct proof of McCullagh's involvement.
Background of the Case
Natalie McNally, a 32-year-old woman who was 15 weeks pregnant, was brutally beaten and stabbed at her home in Lurgan on December 18, 2022. Her partner, Stephen McCullagh, aged 36 and from Woodland Gardens in Lisburn, stands trial for her murder, a charge he has consistently denied. The jury, composed of six men and six women, must deliberate on all evidence presented throughout the proceedings.
Defence's Key Arguments
John Kearney KC highlighted that the "devil is in the detail" of the evidence, pointing to multiple inconsistencies that he claims create reasonable doubt. He stated, "There are some inconvenient, troubling, nagging, not unreasonable doubt pieces that do not fit the prosecution case." According to Kearney, these elements suggest the possibility of another perpetrator, urging the jury to scrutinise the evidence beyond superficial aspects.
Kearney reinforced that McCullagh is entitled to the presumption of innocence and noted that the defendant's decision not to testify should not be held against him. He argued, "It doesn't make an unproven case proven", stressing that the burden of proof lies entirely with the prosecution. The barrister described this as a "classic circumstantial case", with no eyewitnesses present during the crime, as only McNally and her killer were in the house that night.
Critical Evidence and Doubts
A significant point raised by the defence concerns CCTV footage. Kearney pointed out a "big problem" for the prosecution: the absence of video evidence showing McCullagh leaving his Lisburn home on the night of the murder. He contended, "If the prosecution case is right, he should have been picked up leaving his house and he wasn't."
Additionally, Kearney referenced a former boyfriend of McNally, who testified under a reporting restriction. He characterised this individual as the "personification of reasonable doubt" in the case, noting that McCullagh has always believed the ex-boyfriend to be the killer. This testimony, according to the defence, further complicates the prosecution's narrative.
Jury's Deliberation Instructions
Kearney reminded the jury that conviction requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. He explicitly stated, "When you come to this critically important decision on the identity of the killer, if you think he probably is the killer: not enough. If you are almost sure he is the killer: not enough." He emphasised that if any reasonable doubt exists regarding the killer's identity, an acquittal is warranted.
The trial continues as the jury prepares to weigh all evidence before reaching a verdict.
