Jayden Walmsley-Hume, Katie Walmsley trial: Defence presents closing remarks

A defence barrister has told a jury her client, accused of a hit-and-run revenge murder, intended only to park his car and confront the teenager who died.

Alleged murder victim Taj Hart.

A defence barrister in an alleged south coast hit-and-run murder trial has urged the jury to find her client not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter, labelling the death of a teenager an accident.

“Murder, it was not,” defence barrister Sharyn Hall SC told the jury in the NSW Supreme Court in Wollongong on Thursday, weeks into the trial of Katie Walmsley and her son, Jayden Walmsley-Hume.

The Currarong duo are accused of murdering 18-year-old Taj Hart in South Nowra on February 24, 2022.

The pair previously pleaded not guilty to murder, while Walmsley also pleaded not guilty to accessory after the fact to murder.

The trial began on July 17, with prosecutors alleging that Walmsley Hume – with his mother in the passenger seat – swerved off Old Southern Rd, South Nowra, to run down Mr Hart as a form of “revenge” for previous alleged violent altercations.

The trial is taking place at the Wollongong courthouse.

Crown prosecutor Kate Ratcliffe presented her closing remarks to the jury on Wednesday, following weeks of evidence, claiming the mother and son had intent to, at the very least, seriously harm Mr Hart.

She said the decision to run down the teenager arose after he allegedly broke Walmsley-Hume’s arm.

The jury was previously shown an image of Old Southern Rd, South Nowra.

On Thursday, Ms Hall presented her closing remarks, labelling the death on the “fateful day” as nothing more than an accident.

“This was the worst eight seconds of [Walmsley-Hume’s] life,” she told the jury.

Ms Hall said her client was someone who made “spur of the moment” decisions and said this was what happened on February 24, 2022.

She told the jury Walmsley-Hume came across Mr Hart while driving the car and found it to be an opportunity for a confrontation.

Alleged murder victim Taj Hart.

However, upon driving off the roadway – which Ms Hall said was to park the car – the accused changed his mind when considering the consequences of such actions, driving back onto the road, accidentally hitting Mr Hart in the process.

“Return a verdict of not guilty to murder, but guilty to manslaughter,” Ms Hall told the jury.

The submissions from Ms Hall were presented just days after Walmsley-Hume gave evidence to the court during cross examination.

During his evidence, Walmsley-Hume said he thought he hit a pole before later discovering via social media that Mr Hart had been hit by a car.

“He did not have to give a version, he did not have to open himself up for cross-examination,” Ms Hall told the jury.

“He may not be the most sophisticated person, but you heard him speak and he was obviously affected by what he’s done.”

Meanwhile, Walmsley’s defence barrister, Edward Anderson, told the jury on Thursday that in order for his client to be convicted of murder, the jury must believe she made an agreement with her son to kill Mr Hart.

“You would have to accept, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Ms Walmsley, a 37-year-old mother with a young teenage son at home in her care, with no criminal record at all and who had never previously done anything toward the deceased and his friends other than yell and spit in a hat, actually agreed during the course of this drive to deliberately drive a dual cab ute at the deceased,” he said.

Mr Anderson reiterated his client’s crime-free history and her non-violent nature.

“She has never acted violently,” he told the jury.

“Never.”

Justice Robertson Wright adjourned the matter to Friday morning, when he will begin summarising all the evidence, as well as the Crown and defence addresses.

Got a news tip? Email us at [e-mail]