Weatherston a 'coiled spring', defence claims

Clayton Weatherston admits killing Sophie Elliott but denies it was murder. Photo / The Press, Pool

Clayton Weatherston was a "coiled spring" when he went to the home of Sophie Elliott and killed her, his lawyer says.

"And the trigger that unleashed that spring, and set it loose, was what occurred in the bedroom between the two of them when Sophie Elliott, no doubt in anger herself, and frustration, insulted his family yet again, responded to his accusations of infidelity and the need for Sexually Transmitted Disease tests," Weatherston's lawyer, Judith Ablett-Kerr QC, told the High Court today.

"She lost the plot herself when she yelled out `f*** you Clayton' and attacked him with a pair of scissors and knocked his glasses off.....this was the straw that broke the camel's back."

Weatherston, 33, has admitted fatally stabbing and cutting Ms Elliott 216 times on January 9 last year, but says he is guilty of manslaughter not murder. He says he was provoked and lost self-control.

In her closing address to the jury today, Mrs Ablett-Kerr said Weatherston, a former Otago University economics lecturer, was not a "normal" person, but was not a psychopath either.

"If he had gone there to kill, he had to be determined that was to be the end of his normal life," Mrs Ablett-Kerr said

She told the jury they had to judge what had gone on in Ms Elliott's bedroom, alongside what had gone on in the "torrid" relationship between Weatherston and Ms Elliott.

"He was attacked himself with a pair of scissors and that released all the emotion that had been coiled up inside him. That's the reality of the situation."

"Can there really be any other explanation for what occurred? What does your common sense tell you? Whether you want to believe it or not."

While the prosecution had suggested Weatherston had not taken responsibility for his actions, Mrs Ablett-Kerr said he had admitted Ms Elliott's manslaughter - the second most serious offence of all - and the seriousness of an assault of another former girlfriend.

"Did you really get the impression he was not accepting responsibility for what he did?"

The prosecution had also suggested Weatherston was a perfectly normal person, who did not suffer from the personality disorders diagnosed by psychiatrists for the defence.

"Well you saw him. You saw him for five days," Mrs Ablett-Kerr told the jury.

Blood found in the pocket of Weatherston's computer bag, where he stored the knife used to stab Ms Elliott, supported the defence case, she said. It was "absolutely crucial".

It showed Ms Elliott's blood was already on Weatherston's hand when he got the knife out of the bag. The defence says this shows the scissors must have been used first, and therefore Ms Elliott must have come at Weatherston with the scissors.

"Who would have thought... .science would turn out to be on Clayton Weatherston's side in this case."

The prosecution had suggested the scissors were taken to Ms Elliott's home by Weatherston, before withdrawing from that allegation.

Mrs Ablett-Kerr: "Of the course the scissors came the Elliott household, they didn't come from Clayton Weatherston."

"Your eagerness to arrive at your destination sometimes leads you astray."

Mrs Ablett-Kerr said Ms Elliott's relationship with Weatherston's senior university colleague, Robert Alexander, was a major factor in the events.

Ms Elliott was a carrier of information between Weatherston and Dr Alexander, and used Dr Alexander as her "dumping ground for every complaint she had about Clayton Weatherston".

"What chance did their relationship ever have?"

Mrs Ablett-Kerr urged the jury to resist emotion, sympathy and prejudice - the "enemies of good justice".

"The challenge here is to put aside emotion and apply the law of the land."

While lots of people might want to change the law, the law that had to be applied was the law existing today.