Reece Watherston ‘exaggerating’ to justify punch that killed Jack Hanley in Hindley St, court told

The man accused of killing Jack Hanley with a single punch in Hindley St is not telling the full truth of the fight that morning, a court has heard.

Jack Hanley was killed in a Hindley St brawl. He died when he was felled by a single punch, allegedly thrown by Reece Watherston.

• THE PROSECUTION: ‘He killed Jack with a single, powerful punch’
• THE WITNESS: ‘You could hear the thud across a city intersection’
• THE DENIAL: ‘I’m not a fighter … he was huge compared to me’

Jack Hanley’s alleged killer is exaggerating the size and age difference between himself and his victim to justify his single, fatal punch, a court has heard.

On Tuesday, Reece Watherston continued to give evidence in his Supreme Court manslaughter trial.

He has claimed he acted in self-defence when attacked by a “huge” man but, in cross-examination, prosecutor Mark Norman SC said that was a lie.

“You are exaggerating to justify what you did,” he said.

“Mr Hanley was 9cm taller than you … he was 22, you were 20 … you are exaggerating when you say he was ‘huge’.

“You say he attacked you, and you had been doing nothing but yelling — I suggest that’s a lie.”

Reece Watherston outside the Supreme Court last week, with supporters. Picture: AAP / Keryn Stevens

Watherston disagreed. “I’m not exaggerating — he’s a very big male overall,” he said.

“He was standing right in front of me, swinging … I could see his size.

“I did know it had to be a solid punch just because of the size of him.”

Watherston, 22, has pleaded not guilty to one count of manslaughter.

Prosecutors allege he struck Mr Hanley “with all possible force” after their respective groups of friends had scuffled on the corner of Hindley and Morphett streets in December 2017.

Multiple eyewitnesses have given evidence that Mr Hanley was struck even though he did not take part in the aggression.

They have also said the sound of his head striking the pavement was so loud that it was audible across the Hindley/Morphett intersection.

The court has heard all the men involved in the events had taken drugs including MDMA, cannabis and “nossies”, or inhaling small canisters of nitrous oxide.

Watherston, however, has insisted he was acting in self-defence, saying he did not want to fight but was in fear of a “huge male” with clenched, swinging fists.

On Tuesday, Watherston said he was “trying to dodge” punches thrown by Mr Hanley.

“I was never angry, violent or aggressive,” he said.

He rejected a suggestion he could have backed away instead, saying “it all happened very quickly”.

Watherston denied he was trying to hit Mr Hanley as hard as he could, but conceded he was aiming for the face.

However, he also said he believed both men “threw an equal number of punches” at the other’s head.

Asked if he heard Mr Hanley’s head strike the pavement, Watherston said he did not.

“I was scared, I was terrified, I just wanted to get out of there (because) I had just been attacked,” he said.

Mr Norman suggested Watherston simply did not care about Mr Hanley’s fate.

“He was physically hopping to get away from you … he had his back to you … he had his arm up to keep you away from him,” he said.

“You threw a punch at him, even though his back was turned … it did not even matter to you that he was trying to get away.

“Your punch was so hard, your feet came off the floor … you gave it everything you had … you were pressing the attack, you were the aggressor.”

Watherston said that was incorrect.

“I’m not the aggressor, I’m not an aggressive person,” he said. “I never wanted to fight Mr Hanley.”

Mr Norman suggested the evidence proved otherwise.

“I accept that you did not mean to kill Mr Hanley, that you now regret what happened, that you now think of him as ‘Jack’,” he said.

“But on that night, he was just ‘some f — king dude’, as you described him to a taxi driver … you were hyped up, reckless and disinhibited.

“You are either lying or you’ve convinced yourself the (CCTV) footage shows something other than you being the aggressor, and that you didn’t hit him as hard as you could.

“It was more important to you to win that fight than to walk away … You used all your strength as a football player and bricklayer to launch the most vicious punch you could.”

Watherston replied: “I am not a liar.”

The trial, before Justice Anne Bampton and in the absence of a jury, continues.