David Alan Bradshaw on trial in Rockhampton court accused of murder

After about two and a half hours of deliberation, the jury has reached a verdict in the trial of a man accused of murdering another man in a house fire in Rockhampton in 2019.

Crown prosecutor Joshua Phillips leaving Rockhampton Courthouse. Picture: Aden Stokes

After about two and a half hours of deliberation, the jury has reached a verdict in the trial of a man accused of murdering another man in a house fire in Rockhampton in 2019.

David Alan Bradshaw, 42, was on trial in the Rockhampton Supreme Court after pleading not guilty to one count of murder.

The jury heard it was alleged that on August 15, 2019 at Lakes Creek, Mr Bradshaw murdered Mark Petersen.

After deliberating for just over two hours on Wednesday afternoon and about half-an-hour on Thursday morning, the jury informed the court they had reached a verdict.

Mr Bradshaw was found guilty of one count of murder.

He is expected to be sentenced later on Thursday morning.

Jury retires to deliberate verdict

The jury in a trial of a man accused of murdering another man in a house fire in Rockhampton in 2019 has retired to deliberate a verdict.

David Alan Bradshaw, 42, is on trial in the Rockhampton Supreme Court after pleading not guilty to one count of murder.

The jury heard it was alleged that on August 15, 2019 at Lakes Creek, Mr Bradshaw murdered Mark Petersen.

Before retiring to deliberate a verdict, the jury heard the closing addresses from Crown Prosecutor Joshua Phillips and Mr Bradshaw’s defence barrister, Andrew Hoare.

Mr Phillips argued the evidence in the case offered only one credible explanation for Mr Petersen’s death.

“And that’s David Alan Bradshaw and his desire, his plan for serious vengeance, personal vengeance,” he said.

“That’s why Mark Petersen is dead and that’s how he died. Because of the deliberate acts of David Alan Bradshaw.”

He argued Mr Bradshaw was being truthful in his interview with police, as he stated he was at the conclusion of it.

He said the “critical initial decision” for the jury was whether Mr Bradshaw’s act was a “substantial cause” of Mr Petersen’s death.

“The uncontested evidence of the medical cause of his death was smoke inhalation,” he said.

“So what caused the fire? David Alan Bradshaw.

“He confessed to four officers over two instances. The confessions he made were reliable.”

He argued the evidence about suicide was not a credible explanation and were red herrings, as was the evidence of methamphetamine in his system and his skill set with explosives.

He told the jury this type of murder charge did not involve any need for the prosecution to prove an intention to hurt anyone.

“It doesn’t matter whether he wanted to hurt, injure or kill Mark or another occupant of the house that night,” he said.

“The focus of this type of murder is on killing someone when you are busy pursuing some unlawful purpose and the fatal activity is objectively likely to endanger human life.

“He told detectives why he had snapped and decided on this plan to burn Mark’s house down and that was serious vengeance or personal vengeance.

“It is an unlawful purpose to seek to exact serious vengeance or personal vengeance.

“It was not some random arson for arson sake.

“He was there with a purpose, an unlawful one.”

Defence barrister Andrew Hoare leaving Rockhampton Courthouse. Picture: Aden Stokes

Mr Hoare argued his client was not guilty of murder and that it was the true task of the jury to determine whether his client was guilty of manslaughter or nothing at all.

He said at the time of the police interview, his client was taking, at best, a quarter of his medication for his severe paranoid schizophrenia

“The effect of being unmedicated and also exhausted after driving from Rockhampton to Brisbane, he rants and raves,” he said.

“When you hear a person being described as ranting and raving that is not a foundation for a truthful statement.

“You could not be satisfied in that interview that it is reliable and truthful in respect of two critical things the Crown relies upon. Firstly that he started the fire at the house at 4 Hill Street, and secondly, that he did so for the purpose that the Crown asserts.”

He argued that in the interview that immediately after his client falsely recounted a conversation he had with Senior Constable Trevor Smith, he gave the reason why he did it.

“You cannot untangle, on the basis of what Mr Bradshaw has said, where his reality begins and ends,” he said.

“You are left with doubt as to whether David Bradshaw lit that fire.”

He argued there was an explanation as to how the fire started and claimed it was started by Mr Petersen.

“In 2016 while under the influence of drug, Mark Petersen threatened to kill himself by blowing himself and the house up,” he said.

“The day before this fire commences Mark says he may well end himself … and on the 15th after the message on the 14th, there are explosions and a fire.

“Those combined circumstances would cause you to have doubt that Mr Bradshaw started that fire.

“The possibility it was done by Mr Petersen himself cannot be excluded beyond reasonable doubt.

“If you reject that possibility that Mark Petersen in fact caused his own death, it is still not murder, and if you’re satisfied Mr Bradshaw started the fire, it is not murder.”

He argued it was not submitted the act his client described was “inflicting some serious vengeance” nor was the fundamental nature of the act as described likely to endanger human life.

The trial continues on Thursday.

“I went there with the intention to inflict some serious vengeance”

Detective Acting Senior Sergeant Neil Thompson, who was a police officer stationed at Brisbane City Criminal Investigation Branch, was the last witness to take the stand on Tuesday.

Crown prosecutor Joshua Phillips leaving Rockhampton Courthouse with Detective Acting Senior Sergeant Neil Thompson. Picture: Aden Stokes

Detective Acting Senior Sergeant Thompson, together with another officer and later joined by a third, interviewed Mr Bradshaw at the Brisbane City Police Station on September 14, 2019, a recording of which was played to the jury.

The jury heard Mr Bradshaw had severe paranoid schizophrenia and told police the house fire was “just a personal vengeance”.

“I went there with the intention to inflict some serious vengeance,” Mr Bradshaw said in the recording.

He said he intended to “burn his house down”.

“I believe the occupant of the house, not once, but twice attempted to grab me,” he said in the recording.

“Someone came out of the dark and tried to grab me,” he said, describing one incident.

The jury heard Mr Bradshaw told police of a “dog incident” and also a “refrigerator incident” where he walked up some stairs to a shed on a hill that was a bit higher up from the house and that Mr Petersen started talking about fridges and that a “random guy” walked out of a room and started to adjust a video camera focusing on him. He walked out of the shed to get away from them.

The jury heard Mr Bradshaw had first met Mr Petersen at the end of July and only three times after that.

The jury heard that late at night on August 14, Mr Bradshaw walked from George Street to Mr Petersen’s house on Hill Street in Lakes Creek.

Mr Bradshaw “stayed around the train line for a while”, was passed by a purple Ford, cut through four yards and began to climb through the scrub along fence lines, the jury heard.

He came down through the back of the property and saw a dog sitting on the back veranda patio area of Mr Petersen’s house.

He noted the lights were on and that the dog “wasn’t very active”.

He also noted at the front of the house the lights were on and that he could hear the TV.

The jury heard Mr Bradshaw tell police in the recording there was a wooden bench, power point with multiple cords coming out of it, and beside the bench were two wooden chairs with a white nylon rag and some cushions on the chairs.

The jury also heard in the recording played to the court Mr Bradshaw tell police he produced a “random bottle of petrol mixed with kerosene”, put a dab on the white rag, lit the fire and turned around and ran down the hill.

Mr Bradshaw told police he had a lighter and that the bottle, which was 1-litre, “wasn’t even half full”, and that he “put a little drop on it” which he described as 50-100ml.

The jury heard when asked by police if he knew Mr Petersen was there, he responded, “no idea”, and couldn’t remember if he was affected by drugs, but believed he might have been.

The jury heard in the recording it was on that day Mr Bradshaw had formed the intent to go to Mr Petersen’s house.

“I snapped,” he said in the recording.

After Mr Thompson had given evidence on the stand, the prosecution closed its case and Mr Bradshaw’s defence barrister, Andrew Hoare, said his client would neither give nor call evidence.

Forensic pathologist on the cause of death

The first witness to take the stand on Tuesday was senior forensic pathologist Doctor Nathan Milne, who examined Mr Petersen’s remains and prepared an autopsy report.

During Dr Milne’s cross examination by crown prosecutor Joshua Phillips, the jury heard Mr Petersen’s remains were severely damaged by fire and that he died of smoke inhalation.

“I came to that determination based on the toxicology findings,” Dr Milne said.

“The carbon monoxide level was at 74 per cent.

“Any level over 50 per cent is potentially lethal and Mr Petersen had a level of 74 per cent and in the context of being found at the scene of a house fire that’s indicative of smoke inhalation.

“Other evidence of smoke inhalation is I could see the soot down his airways.

“Toxicology also showed the presence of cyanide.”

The jury heard a sample of Mr Petersen’s blood from the remains was sent away and examined and showed the presence of methamphetamine in his system.

Dr Milne said the level detected in Mr Petersen was 0.17 milligrams per kilogram.

“A potentially lethal range of methamphetamine is anything from about 0.1, however, methamphetamine has different effects on different people and one of the important things is tolerance,” Dr Milne told the court.

“If someone has been taking methamphetamine daily for years their body has grown very tolerant to the drug, so a level of 0.17 in a habitual user might have no obvious effect on that person.

“If someone has taken methamphetamine for the first time in their life and gets to a level of 0.17 that potentially is lethal.”

The trial of David Alan Bradshaw starts

Crown prosecutor Joshua Phillips told the jury in his opening statement on April 17 that when Mr Petersen’s remains were discovered, there was almost nothing left of Mr Petersen.

“He died in this house fire that had been deliberately lit in the early hours of the morning despite other signs that he was in there,” Mr Phillips said while a video of the house fire played to the jury.

“He died in this house fire that had been deliberately lit because David Alan Bradshaw wanted to inflict ‘some serious vengeance’.

“We know all of this because about a month after this house fire the defendant packed up his belongings here in Rockhampton, drove down to Brisbane, walked into the police station and confessed twice.”

The first witness to take the stand was Mr Petersen’s ex-partner Kylie Rhule, whose relationship with the deceased ended in 2017.

Kylie Rhule leaving Rockhampton Courthouse. Picture: Aden Stokes

A diagram of the house plan of 4 Hill Street, Lakes Creek, was presented to the court and showed where timber was stored downstairs on concrete under the house.

During the cross examination of Ms Rhule by Mr Phillips, the jury heard she received a series of text messages from Mr Petersen on August 14, 2019, which included: “Today could well be the day I crack and do something like end myself”, and, “Life was not meant to be this way”.

The jury also heard Ms Rhule received about 20 phone calls that day from Mr Petersen and that she answered about 10 of them and that on those calls he was abusive and asking her for money.

During Ms Rhule’s cross examination by Mr Bradshaw’s defence barrister, Andrew Hoare, the jury heard Mr Petersen had training in explosives.

The jury heard Ms Rhule saw Mr Petersen smoking a glass pipe on November 27, 2017 and that she did not know what he was smoking but knew it was not cannabis which she had saw him smoke in the past and that it was the final straw for her.

The jury also heard Ms Rhule recalled Mr Petersen talked about blowing himself up and blowing his house up in 2016 and that the next occasion he talked about harming himself was on August 14, 2019.

On re-examination of Ms Rhule by Mr Phillips, the jury heard Mr Petersen did not work in explosives while they were in a relationship and that she did not see any detonators nor explosives at Hill Street.

During the cross examination of Carolyne Cockerell, who used to live at 3 Hill Street, Lakes Creek, by Mr Phillips, the jury heard she went out at night on August 14, 2019 and got home about 9pm and saw lights on at 4 Hill Street.

The jury heard Ms Cockerell was woken by a dog barking and opened the curtain and saw flames over at 4 Hill Street and that she called Triple-0, saw the entire house on fire and took a video, which was played to the jury during Mr Phillips’ opening statement.

Mr Hoare put to Ms Cockerell that she was still in bed when she heard a bang, then heard a further three explosions as she was going to the front door and upon reaching the front door the house was ablaze.

The jury was shown 15 photographs during the cross examination of Peter Guley, who was a station officer for the fire service and attended 4 Hill Street, Lakes Creek, on August 15, 2019 to examine a fire and saw the dwelling almost entirely demolished.

One of the photographs showed remnants of the house showing some gas bottles in the foreground and another showed the main area of damage to the house, a bent beam and the deceased’s remains.

The jury heard the deceased’s remains appeared to be facing down.

The jury also heard the gas bottles were intact.

The last witness to take the stand on Monday was Senior Constable Trevor Smith, who was a police officer and worked at Police Headquarters on Roma Street on September 14, 2019.

Senior Constable Trevor Smith leaving Rockhampton Courthouse. Picture: Aden Stokes

During the cross examination of Senior Constable Smith by Mr Phillips, the jury heard Senior Constable Smith was a counter officer when Mr Bradshaw attended the counter at 5.45pm.

The jury heard Senior Constable Smith asked Mr Bradshaw what he was there for and that his response was, “I’m handing myself in, I’m pretty sure I’ve done something bad”.

The jury further heard Senior Constable Smith asked Mr Bradshaw why he thought he was wanted by police and that his response was he had just driven down from Rockhampton, that he had set fire to a house, burning it down, and believed someone was inside the house at the time.