The man accused of murdering, dismembering and decapitating Christchurch father of three Richard Leman and dumping his partial remains in the boot of his own car has been found guilty.
A jury took two days to unanimously agree that Michael Scott Rodger murdered Leman, 41, by shooting him twice at an associate’s North Canterbury house in April 2023.
Using various tools, Rodger then removed Leman’s limbs and head. He put the torso in Leman’s car and parked it in a shed at a vacant property.
The rest of the victim’s body has never been found.
Leman’s remains were found in April 2023 and Rodger, now 49, was later charged with murder.
He has been on trial in the High Court at Christchurch before Justice Jonathan Eaton and a jury.
Rodger maintains he did not kill Leman.
He told the court that on the night of the murder, he went to visit Morgan “Molly” Grant and Leman was already dead.
He admitted to helping dispose of the body but said his only crime was being an accessory after the fact of murder.
The jury have heard evidence from more than 30 witnesses including Grant and Sara Plimmer, a friend of Leman’s who was there when he died.
Both women told the court Rodger shot Leman twice and threatened to kill them too if they told anyone.
Rodger said the women had worked together to frame him and that another man, referred to in court as Mr X, was the real killer.
On Tuesday morning, Justice Eaton delivered a comprehensive summary of the case before the jury retired to deliberate just after midday.
Just after 12.30pm today the jury confirmed a verdict had been reached. They found Rodger guilty of Leman’s murder.
When the verdict was read in court, Rodger stood silent in the dock.
The Leman family said in a statement today that the verdict brings justice for Richard.
“Nothing will ever undo what was done to him, and nothing will ever bring him back to the people who loved him.
“Richard was not just a name in a courtroom or a case in a trial. He was a son, a father, a brother, an uncle, and a man who was deeply loved by those closest to him,” the family said.
“For weeks we have had to sit through the most confronting and painful evidence imaginable. We have been forced to hear and see the devastating reality of how Richard’s life was taken.
“No family should ever have to endure that.
“Today, the jury has recognised the truth of what happened. Someone has been held accountable for Richard’s death.
“While this verdict cannot heal the grief we carry, it does acknowledge that Richard’s life mattered and that what happened to him cannot simply be ignored.”
In summing up the case, Justice Eaton reminded the 12 men and women that Rodger denied murdering Leman – but had freely admitted in court he was “involved in the concealing of his body”.
Rodger maintained Leman was dead when he arrived at Grant’s address, and while he helped to dispose of the body, he was “not physically involved in dismembering” the victim.
He had said Leman was shot and killed by a “Mr X” and that Grant and Plimmer colluded to “falsely implicate” him.
The Crown said there was no evidence anyone else was at the house on the night Leman died.
“The Crown says… if you stand back, the defence is unconvincing,” Justice Eaton said.
“Is it plausible that he stumbles across a scene where someone he knows was shot and killed?
“The Crown says … it is not bad luck and coincidence that CCTV evidence, telecommunications evidence and forensic evidence all converge on one person – and that is Mr Rodger.”
He said the defence position was simple – that Grant and Plimmer were not credible witnesses and their evidence could not be believed.
“[The defence] says in relation to the evidence of Morgan Grant and Sara Plimmer – that that evidence simply has no value and ought to be pushed aside by you,” Justice Eaton said.
“By way of summary, the theme that runs through the defence case is that it is the Crown that bears the onus of proof – and that the standard of proof is high, being one of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
“It’s the defence case that on close analysis, what [the Crown] spent time describing as... non-negotiable evidence, doesn’t in fact go any further than establishing that Mr Roger was guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
“And you are really being invited to rely critically on the evidence of Sara Plimmer and Morgan Grant, and it’s the defence case that you could not safely do so.”
“And therefore… you should find Mr Rodger not guilty of murder.”
Anna Leask is a senior journalist who covers national crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2008 and has worked as a journalist for 20 years with a particular focus on family and gender-based violence, child abuse, sexual violence, homicides, mental health and youth crime. She writes, hosts and produces the award-winning podcast, A Moment In Crime, released monthly on nzherald.co.nz