Bevan John Brougham found guilty of manslaughter over death of lover, Whyalla woman Dianne Rogan

A MAN who killed his lover during an argument in their adulterous relationship has been acquitted of her murder but convicted of manslaughter.

A MAN who killed his lover during an argument in their adulterous relationship has been acquitted of her murder but convicted of manslaughter.

Supreme Court Justice John Sulan this afternoon found Bevan John Brougham, 53, guilty of manslaughter over the death of Dianne Rogan at Whyalla in July 2013.

Brougham had been charged with the murder of Mrs Rogan, but Justice Sulan found him guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

Mrs Rogan’s body was found in the backyard of her Sharp St home, in a garden area near her spa bath, along with broken plastic lawn furniture and two plastic wine glasses.

At trial, prosecutors had alleged Brougham used his fists, feet and the furniture to stage a “sustained and extremely violent” attack when Mrs Rogan refused his sexual advances.

Prosecutor Mark Norman, SC, said Brougham’s actions were likely motivated by sexual rejection, as he was a man who had previously “boasted about committing adultery”.

Mr Norman said Brougham was linked to the crime by a piece of flesh from his foot that was found lodged between Mrs Rogan’s teeth, indicating he “stomped” on her head.

“The attack upon Mrs Rogan was sustained and extremely violent ... it allows for no conclusion other than he, at the very least, he intended to cause her grievous bodily harm,” he said.

Mrs Rogan, 52, and her husband, Kevin, were both justices of the peace and well known in the Whyalla community.

Mr Rogan was overseas with his son, Jack, at the time of her death.

Brougham took the stand in his own defence.

He said he accidentally, not deliberately, killed Mrs Rogan as they argued in a spa pool about ending their adulterous relationship so he could pursue a Filipino bride.

“I (had) made a decision to end the relationship (with Mrs Rogan), tell her face-to-face, break it to her gently,” he said.

“She was very irritated ... extremely angry, she went ballistic (with a) raised voice and explosive response.

“She grabbed onto my foot, my right foot, and bit down hard on it ... I kicked out because it hurt.”

When asked by Mr Norman if it had “ever crossed his mind” to call 000, Brougham said “never”.

“I just panicked ... I thought I might have accidentally killed Dianne,” Brougham said.

“I just remember feeling that I was, that I had failed, just failed overwhelmingly, crushed by failure.”

Justice Sulan said he could not be satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that Brougham assaulted Mrs Rogan with the intention of killing her or causing grievous bodily harm.

He said Brougham was significantly intoxicated when he deliberately and forcefully hit Mrs Rogan on several occasions.

“Given Brougham’s state of intoxication, I do not draw an inference that he intended to kill or do grievous bodily harm based on the injuries to Mrs Rogan’s face and head,” he said.

“The injuries could well have been inflicted in an intoxicated state without the necessary comprehension that a sober person would have when inflicting such severe blows.”

Justice Sulan said he could not exclude the possibility Brougham had performed CPR on Mrs Rogan.

“The conduct of performing CPR is, in my view, inconsistent with the accused having formed a specific intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm,” he said.

Brougham was remanded in custody to face sentencing submissions next month.