Dawson could give evidence depending on defence strategy

Chris Dawson could be called to give evidence as the murder trial of the teacher and former rugby league player enters its ninth week in the NSW Supreme Court.

Chris Dawson leaves NSW Supreme Court. The former schoolteacher is alleged to have murdered his wife Lynette 40 years ago. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Jeremy Piper

The murder trial of teacher and former rugby league player Chris Dawson will enter its ninth week in the NSW Supreme Court with the prospect of him being called to give evidence.

Dawson’s defence team will decide as soon as Monday whether it will advance the accused as a witness after two months of often harrowing evidence over the disappearance of his first wife, Lyn Dawson, in early January 1982.

The trial was told of the deterioration of the Dawson marriage in the months leading up to her vanishing along with details of Chris Dawson’s sexual relationship with one of his high school students, and heard of alleged sightings of the young mother months and sometimes years after she supposedly walked out of her relationship.

Dawson has pleaded not guilty.

This week, his defence team, led by barrister Pauline David, has the opportunity to call fresh witnesses over anything relating to Lyn’s disappearance, anything said in the crown’s case, and anything in relation to the accused’s good character.

This then leaves the crown open to cross-examine these witnesses. This scenario would be the reverse of the trial to date, whereby witnesses called by the crown have been cross-examined by the defence.

Dawson has a right to remain silent and the defence doesn’t have to disclose anything to the crown unless it’s related to the issue of an alibi.

Given the murder trial has been “judge alone”, or one in the absence of a jury and presided over by judge Ian Harrison, the defence may consider Dawson, an educated man, may be compelling on the witness stand.

Whatever Dawson’s defence decides, if it chooses to introduce new witnesses, it will be required to go first when it comes to its final submission to the court, in effect giving the crown the last word.

Chris Dawson and Lynette Dawson. Photo: Supplied

This might be seen as an advantage in a trial before a jury but may be mitigated given it has been heard before Justice Harrison.

The crown’s final verbal submission may take at least a full day. The same may apply to the defence.

The trial is expected to continue until Friday, but it’s possible it might push into a 10th week.

The trial began in early May and by all accounts was projected to last anywhere between four and six weeks. The “judge alone” factor was expected to speed up proceedings, but it has been a trial literally impacted by life and death as it has unspooled in court 9D of the Supreme Court in Sydney’s Queen’s Square legal precinct in the city CBD.

First, Crown Prosecutor Craig Everson SC was struck down with Covid, which knocked out a week of hearings. Then proceedings were briefly affected by funerals for two respected legal figures – NSW District Court judge Peter Zahra and late last week Brad ­Hughes SC.

As well, the defence team has on occasion asked for more preparation time.

There is speculation over how long Justice Harrison might take to deliver his judgment. Lawyers familiar with “judge alone” trials say that may take one to two months. Once his decision has been made, all parties will be recalled to the court and Justice Harrison will simply declare a guilty or not guilty verdict, then refer to his published reasons.