Challenge to expert's view on time of death

A pathologist yesterday rejected an accusation that her estimate of the time Joanne McCarthy was bludgeoned to death was "totally unsafe."

The suggestion was made to Dr Jane Vuletic by defence lawyer Barry Hart in the High Court at Auckland, where Travis Burns, aged 32, is on trial for the murder of the 33-year-old Whangaparaoa kindergarten teacher on November 12, 1998.

The time of death and how it relates to Burns' movements on the day of the killing have become critical issues for both the Crown and defence.

Joanne McCarthy was last seen alive at 11.35 am and was found dead in the bath at her home about 1.40 pm.

Dr Vuletic told prosecutor Christine Gordon on Tuesday that factors such as the body's temperature and coloration led her to believe Joanne McCarthy died in the first hour after last being seen alive.

But yesterday Dr Vuletic acknowledged that at the depositions hearing in August she said she had not made an attempt to estimate the time of death because of a number of factors, including the fact that there were no scientific means available to do so.

She said at the time that she did not make a practice of estimating the time of death because it was so inaccurate.

Dr Vuletic told the High Court jury yesterday that she was not aware at the depositions hearing that the time of death was an issue and had not considered it at that stage.

She agreed with Mr Hart she had since been approached by the Crown wanting her to focus on the question of the time of death.

Dr Vuletic said she told the Crown what scientific data she would need to express a different opinion to her evidence at the depositions hearing.

Mr Hart said that another pathologist, Associate Professor Timothy Koelmeyer, had indicated that he would not be prepared to express an opinion based on the new factors.

Dr Vuletic rejected a suggestion from Mr Hart that her opinion as to the time of death was "totally unsafe."

She said that she would not describe her evidence at the High Court as "contrary" to what she said at the depositions hearing.

"At the depositions hearing I was unaware of some factors which I now believe are helpful in trying to estimate when death was more likely to occur ... The opinion I gave at depositions was the standard opinion, which Dr Koelmeyer also agreed with.

"But it has been put to me that there are a number of other factors which may enable me to make an educated guess about when the death was more likely to occur - and that is what I have done."

She said it was common for the Crown, the police or the defence to provide new information, even during the course of a trial, to assist her either to formulate or revise her opinion.