Convicted murderer Nicholas James Cross makes application to appeal Supreme Court verdict over death of Maddison Pante-Parrott

A Centrelink call could be crucial to whether a convicted murderer who shot a woman and burned her body in a tent will be granted an appeal.

Nicholas Cross was found guilty in the Supreme Court of murdering Maddison Pante-Parrott at the Geelong Showgrounds in 2018. Source: Supplied.

A Centrelink phone call could be crucial to whether a convicted murderer who shot a woman and burned her body in a tent will be granted an appeal, a court has heard

Nicholas James Cross was sentenced in the Supreme Court last year after he was found guilty of murdering Maddison Pante-Parrott in a tent at the Geelong Showgrounds in 2018.

Cross appeared via video from Barwon Prison on Monday during his application for leave to appeal the murder verdict.  

Nicholas James Cross was sentenced to 27 years imprisonment, with a non parole period of 21 years,
in the Supreme Court last year. Picture: Supplied.

Barrister for the appellant, Glenn Casement, told the panel of judges that Cross’ representatives had filed a written case with eight grounds for appeal.

The first ground, according to Mr Casement, focused on a five-minute phone call between the sole eyewitness of the shooting, Brodi Costello and a Centrelink officer which he claimed the witness relied upon for his innocence because he was busy on the phone.

The Appellant’s position is that Justice Rita Incerti’s decision was “unsafe and unsatisfactory” because she erred in her approach to the evidence of the ‘Centrelink call’, among other factors.

The other grounds included not giving other witness’ evidence sufficient weight and the unreliability of Mr Costello.

Family and friends of Ms Pante-Parrott told media they were “overjoyed” following Cross’ guilty verdict.

During the trial, Mr Costello gave evidence of a transaction of events which included pausing the call to tell Cross and Ms Pante-Parrott to stop arguing, a gunshot, a demand from Cross for the witness to get in the car, and a comment about not staying in the tent with a dead body.

Mr Casement said the Justice Incerti could not resolve how the series of events could have taken place during the call within the confines of a 5sq m “glamping tent” without the Centrelink officer noting anything unusual.

He said that while the trial focused on the assessment that it was plausible the officer did not hear a gunshot, it was unlikely the officer did not hear a transaction of “chaotic events” that would prompt them to note it down or notify a manager.

Mr Casement said the acceptance of the shooting taking place during the phone call, which Justice Incerti said went to the credit of the witness, needed to be re-evaluated.

The application for appeal was heard in the Supreme Court on Monday April 29. Picture: Penny Stephens

Barrister for the Office of Public Prosecution, Elizabeth Ruddle KC, said the applicant had focused on a very specific part of evidence that the trial judge took into consideration as part of the entire case.

Ms Ruddle KC said the focus on evidence of Mr Costello returning to the tent after the shooting was a “red herring” when comparing the actions of both men following the shooting.

She said Cross was instrumental in the initial cover up efforts, which included swapping out the Suzuki Swift was used to drive from the Showground, that was later found burnt out and spoke to his conscience of guilt outlined in the judgement.

Ms Ruddle submitted the grounds of appeal were not reasonable and the application for leave to appeal should be refused.

Justice Kristen Walker, Justice Lesley Taylor and Justice Christopher Boyce presided over the appeal application.

The hearing concluded and the judges reserved their decision for a later date.