Victor Codea murder trial: Four men accused of school carpark ambush say they’re just bullies

They stand accused of a fatal high school carpark ambush, but these four men say they’re just bullies with no “murderous intent”.

The “tragic and unnecessary” death of Victor Codea arose from the “bully-boy chest-thumping” and bravado of “druggies”, not a planned “clockwork” murder, a court has heard.

Jeremy Dale Sandell, Kain Mazomenos, Thomas Nichols and Thomas Pinnington say they cannot be found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of murdering Mr Codea in Adelaide High School’s carpark.

They have told the Supreme Court their actions are more like “keyboard warriors posturing” about themselves in the “underworld melee” of the drug culture than premeditated murderers.

They say the court can at most conclude they sought to “touch up” Mr Codea to “teach him a lesson” – amounting only to “textbook, stock-standard” manslaughter.

“That’s what this case is all about – it’s a lesson,” Bill Boucaut KC, for Sandell, said.

“You don’t murder someone to teach them a lesson because, if they are dead, the lesson is not learned.”

Mr Nichols, 31, Sandell, 25, Mr Mazomenos, 26, and Mr Pinnington, 25, have each pleaded not guilty to murder.

Sandell has pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

Accused Thomas Nichols, Thomas Pinnington, Jeremy Dale Sandell and Kain Mazomenos at Adelaide High School for the Victor Codea murder trial. Picture: NCA NewsWire/ No Byline

Prosecutors allege the August 2020 ambush of Mr Codea was a response to bad online reviews of drugs sold by Sandell, who has pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

An eyewitnesses told the trial that the attack, in the Adelaide High School carpark, felt like “it went for 10 seconds” and involved blows that “were not fairy taps”.

The passage of the trial has been anything but smooth.

After several days of evidence, it was hit with a “wrecking ball” when Mr Nichols’ original counsel withdrew from the case, saying they could no longer represent him.

Several days later it resumed – avoiding a potential clash with another high-profile trial – in a courtroom that was too small, with defence counsel sitting in the jury box.

In his closing address, Mr Boucaut said there “can be no misunderstanding” that Mr Codea’s death was “unnecessary and tragic”.

“It was brought about by violence, by bullying conduct in the context of the druggie subculture, by posturing and chest-thumping,” he said.

He said that was demonstrated by Sandell’s online responses to the bad reviews of his illegal business.

Victor Codea’s death was “tragic and unnecessary”, the court heard. Picture: Facebook

“This posturing and bravado, on the part of Sandell, is not consistent with murderous intent but rather the behaviour of a keyboard warrior,” he said.

“(It shows) a bully boy who’s going to teach a lesson, but not somebody who has murder on his mind.”

Mr Boucaut conceded the attack on Mr Codea “appeared to happen like clockwork” but said that did not turn it into a murder.

“The court may conclude that this was to send a message to Mr Codea – that this sort of conduct will bring about punishment, and that punishment is you’re going to be roughed up.

“But that does not elevate what I say is a textbook, stock-standard case of manslaughter to murder.”

Nick Vadasz, for Mr Mazomenos, said there was no evidence his client knew Mr Nichols or Mr Pinnington prior to that night.

He agreed with Mr Boucaut that, at most, the incident was “a touch-up” amounting to manslaughter.

However, he said it was possible the group intended to “confront” Mr Codea without violence and ask him to stop posting bad reviews.

Mr Vadasz said the court should remember a non-working, imitation firearm was found in Mr Codea’s car after the incident.

“These men lived in an underworld melee... it’s notorious these days that persons who traffic in drugs are armed,” he said.

“It would make sense, if you wanted to talk to someone about an unpleasant topic, to dissuade them from wanting to use a weapon by having others with you.”

Victor Codea, 24, was allegedly bashed to death by a group of men in the car park of Adelaide High School. Picture: SA Police

Mr Vadasz urged the court to reject the evidence of the sole eyewitness to the attack, saying it was unreliable.

“You cannot believe a word she says... she was such a prolific and willing liar that you do not know what the truth is,” he said.

Grant Algie KC, for Mr Pinnington, said Sandell’s “boasting and big-noting” did not prove Mr Pinnington knew how angry the dealer was, nor what was to happen to Mr Codea.

He said any plan to attack Mr Codea – if there was one – was likely formed only minutes before the incident.

“What was done in this case provides the best evidence as to what the plan was,” he said.

“All they had done was apply blunt force to Mr Codea and then they left, over a period of possibly only 10 seconds... the men executed the plan and left.

“That is consistent and indicative of a plan to assault.”

Mr Algie said the location of the incident further supported his submission that the plan went no further than assault.

“It was clearly a public place in public view, well-lit and floodlit... it was open, plain, able to be seen,” he said.

He said any kicks allegedly delivered by his client, from 1.2m away through the passenger side door while wearing sneakers, were better described as “stomps”.

During the trial, the court heard allegations Mr Mazomenos and two unknown men had attacked a different dealer, days before Mr Codea’s death, believing that man had posted the bad reviews.

Mr Algie said that was “powerful” proof that any plan to attack Mr Codea was designed to cause injury, not death.

“This shows how Mr Mazomenos apparently responds to disquiet and displeasure... ‘we are gonna smack him up a bit’, then they leave, job done – that’s the plan,” he said.

Jane Abbey KC, for Mr Nichols, said the court could find her client guilty of manslaughter but not murder.

The evidence against him, she said, did not amount to proof he was part of a plan to kill Mr Codea, only a plan to assault him.

That plan, she said, included Sandell getting out of Mr Codea’s car and Mr Mavromatis, Mr Pinnington and Mr Thomas then surrounding the vehicle.

“(That) demonstrates an agreement to do violence, but it does not prove beyond reasonable doubt anything else,” she said.

“It’s not an attack that demonstrates intention to do grievous bodily harm nor foresight about it.”

Justice Adam Kimber said he would carefully consider counsel’s submissions.

“It was a bit more than bullying, wasn’t it? At least as I understand bullying,” he said.

He remanded the four men in custody and will hand down his verdict on a date to be set.