Fortitude Valley station murder: Seyram Kwami Djentuh claims self defence on appeal
A convicted murderer who fatally stabbed a man with scissors in Fortitude Valley has claimed he feared for his life during a confrontation that led to the killing.
A convicted murderer, who stabbed his victim in the neck with scissors during a Fortitude Valley confrontation, has claimed self defence on appeal.
Seyram Kwami Djentuh petitioned to the Court of Appeal for acquittal on Wednesday, claiming he feared for his life when he stabbed Lauie Tagaloa on July 11, 2022.
Djentuh had agreed to fight Tagaloa’s friend Fernando Siologa that morning at the Brunswick Street Mall, a jury was told throughout his trial earlier this year. Mr Siologa is not charged over the incident.
Djentuh then attended what was supposed to be a fist fight armed with scissors, which he had retrieved from a nearby NightOwl, the jury were told.
He stabbed Mr Tagaloa in the neck and fled after the other man approached him with his hands down by his side.
Djentuh was sentenced to life imprisonment in August last year after a Brisbane jury convicted him of a single count of murder.
On appeal, defence barrister Andrew Hoare said Djentuh had “armed himself in a defensive way” after watching Mr Siologa’s group outnumber and overpower his own associates.
Mr Hoare said the stabbing occurred in the context of his client having just watched Mr Tagaloa, who was a much larger man, brutally stomp on his friend’s head.
He claimed Djentuh had been facing a “massed assault” while a bystander filmed and called out for him to be “smashed” and “killed”.
Mr Hoare noted Djentuh had expressed his fear of being stabbed to the NightOwl store owner when he retrieved the scissors there - which he said revealed his state of mind as being defensive.
He submitted that the jury’s guilty verdict was “unreasonable” and that they should have acquitted Djentuh or alternatively found him guilty of manslaughter.
Prosecutor Gregory Cummings said the jury were entitled to reject the defence’s “narrative” of self defence, which had already been argued for at trial.
He emphasised that Mr Tagaloa had posed no active threat when he was stabbed, as his arms had been down.
Mr Cummings argued Djentuh’s behaviour wasn’t consistent with the defence narrative that he had been hiding out of fear before the fight - given he had opportunities to flee the scene or call police but instead chose to move towards Mr Siologa’s group.
“This fellow has enough time to just turn around and leave, but he re-engages and he re-engages with a knife,” Mr Cummings said.
The defence also submitted that the presiding judge should have reiterated to the jury evidence about Djentuh’s lack of intent in his closing.
But Mr Cummings said the defence raised no objections with the judge’s closing at the time.
He also noted they would have been motivated to avoid emphasis on Djentuh’s intent, given they were vying for acquittal based on self defence, not acquittal and conviction on the alternative of manslaughter - which would have required more focus on intent.
A decision will be handed down by the Court of Appeal at a later date.
