Chris Dawson trial told ex-teacher never ‘groomed’ his schoolgirl lover

Dawson’s counsel Pauline David said the state of his relationship with the teenager was important because Dawson’s character was at issue in the trial.

Former teacher Chris Dawson never took advantage of his schoolgirl lover but instead genuinely cared for her, his counsel has told the Supreme Court.

Barrister Pauline David said in her final address as the murder trial draws to a close that he never “groomed” the teenager, known as JC, despite the evidence given to the contrary by the woman.

Ms David said it was an important point because Dawson’s character was at issue in the trial.

She said the judge should reject the Crown submissions that it was the “highly selfish” relationship which JC had “endeavoured to portray”.

It rather grew out of an ordinary student-teacher relationship.

Former teacher Chris Dawson at the Supreme court on Monday. Picture: Nikki Short

“The fact that they ultimately married demonstrates that it was a relationship which involved caring and love,” she said.

“We wouldn’t say that he took advantage of her.”

Lynette and her husband Chris Dawson in 1974.

Dawson, 73, has pleaded not guilty to the murder on January 8 or January 9, 1982, of his first wife ­Lynette, who disappeared, aged 33, from their home in Sydney’s northern beaches.

He claims she walked out of their marriage, leaving their two daughters behind.

The prosecution alleges Dawson murdered her so he could have an “unfettered” relationship with his young lover, who he met when she was a Year 11 student.

JC moved into the family’s Bayview home days after Ms Dawson disappeared and the couple married. They later had a child of their own.

Missing mother Lynette Dawson with one of her daughters.

It was during their acrimonious divorce 10 years later when JC went to police and said she believed he had murdered his first wife.

The defence claims she was motivated to “lie” because of the custody battle they were involved in.

Ms David said in her submissions that it had been in no way appropriate or acceptable for Dawson to have an affair with JC and then move her into his home.

“(But) it doesn’t make him a murderer,” she said.

“The defence submission is that based upon the evidence before this court, the only verdict can be a not-guilty verdict.”

She said that Ms Dawson was understandably deeply hurt by her husband’s relationship with JC and that was why she abandoned her family.

She said that the fact he was in another relationship did not mean that he stopped having regard or feelings for his then-wife.

The trial before Justice Ian Harrison as a judge sitting alone is expected to wind up today when he will reserve his verdict.