By TONY STICKLEY and MONIQUE DEVEREUX
Daniel McCarthy, convicted of manslaughter after shooting his father, Patrick, has dropped his claim for part of the dead man's $2 million estate.
Renouncing the case means McCarthy will not be open to an O.J. Simpson-style outcome of being found civilly liable for intentional killing,
which his aunt and uncle were hoping to prove to stop him benefiting from the estate.
Patrick McCarthy, aged 57, was shot dead on his farm at Parakai, near Helensville, in January 1998. Daniel, who was 15 at the time of the killing, was tried for murder but found guilty of manslaughter, and received an 18-month suspended jail sentence.
He then filed a claim in the High Court at Auckland for part of his father's $2 million estate - a claim vehemently opposed by Patrick McCarthy's siblings Roland and Rosaleen McCarthy.
The brother and sister were to present new evidence at the civil case which they believed would show McCarthy intended to kill his father, and was therefore not entitled to a share in the estate.
In a criminal case, the standard of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt," but in a civil case the threshold is lower - "on the balance of probabilities."
Last month, Justice Bruce Robertson awarded Roland and Rosaleen McCarthy the right to present new evidence about the discharge of the fatal rifle.
They had also wanted the court to hear about the boy's relationship with his father and his behavioural history at one of the country's top schools.
They claimed that allegations that McCarthy was treated violently by his father were not sufficiently investigated.
The brother and sister are represented by Robert Fardell. He said yesterday that the dropping of the civil case meant the estate could be distributed according to Patrick McCarthy's original wishes.
Gerrard Winter, who represents Daniel McCarthy, would not elaborate on why the teenager had dropped the proceedings, saying only: "Daniel has decided he doesn't wish to proceed."
