Five people killed in a deliberately-lit hostel fire were staying in “death traps” and had no hope of escaping the blaze, a jury has heard.
The month-long murder trial for the man accused of lighting the fire is drawing to a close in the High Court at Wellington this week as the Crown prosecutor began his final address to the jury.
Prosecutor Grant Burston said they could be sure the 50-year-old knew his actions could kill people when he lit the fires at Newtown’s Loafer’s Lodge in May 2023.
The defendant has pleaded not guilty to arson and five charges of murder for killing Mike Wahrlich, Liam Hockings, Peter O’Sullivan, Melvin Parun and Kenneth Barnard.
He has interim name suppression and is claiming a defence of insanity but does not dispute that he lit the fire. He has previously been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and absconded from a mental health facility weeks before the fire.
Burston said the defendant was familiar with fire and had previously burned down a cooking shed and attempted to burn down a butcher shop when he was angry.
He took the jury through the night of the hostel fires, when the defendant initially lit a couch on fire and left the building, leaving behind his room key and access fob.
“He did not think he would need his key again, he was going to burn Loafers Lodge down,” Burston said.
The man did not know other residents had discovered and extinguished the fire in time to prevent a proper blaze. He returned later in the evening and found no sign his fire had been successful.
“Instead of the burning building, he came back to silence.”
The man sought the help of another resident to get back into the building and up to the third floor, where he spent some time unsuccessfully trying to get back into his room, before lighting another fire in a wardrobe shortly after midnight.
He waits around long enough to ensure the fire has fully taken and smoke is beginning to fill the hallway before he leaves the building again, not making any attempt to warn another resident he sees while waiting for the lift.
“Dr Skipworth described [the man] as having taken a series of purposeful, co-ordinated, determined and deliberate actions. These actions were clearly coordinated,” Burston said.
“These actions were carried out to ensure that a substantial fire was well under way before [he] left the building.”
Burston then described the desperate actions taken by residents to escape the inferno, pointing to one man’s account of leaping for his life out his window, just five minutes after the defendant had left the building.
At that point, the “immense heat” of the fire was already so strong the resident knew he could “either burn inside or jump”, Burston said.
He described residents screaming for help, and others smashing their way through skylights and climbing to the roof.
“It was incredibly dangerous for residents in that building,” he said.
The men killed in the fire were unable to escape as the others had done.
“When trapped in his room, Mr Barnard did not have a hope of getting out of his skylight. He was trapped and the fire took him because he had nowhere to go, and nor did the other four men who died trapped in their rooms. It was extremely dangerous and it was obvious.”
Burston pointed to numerous instances in interviews where the defendant referred to burning the building down, and referenced how people could get hurt in such a scenario.
He said this showed the defendant knew the risk that followed from his actions.
Burston also said defence lawyer Louise Sziranyi was expected to argue that the defendant did not appreciate the fire could kill people as he might be entitled to believe existing fire safety systems would act as intended and residents would evacuate in time.
For that to be an acceptable argument, the jury would have to be satisfied the defendant believed the building alarm would go off and alert the residents in time, that the fire brigade would be alerted and respond immediately, that the residents would follow an evacuation plan and that they would all co-operate with authorities and follow safety instructions.
“The dreadful reality in this case is that by the time the residents on the mezzanine floor smelt or saw smoke, it was too late for five of them. By that time, their fate had already been sealed,” Burston said.
“The fourth-floor mezzanine rooms were death traps if the escape paths were blocked.”
There was no basis for the defendant to think “I’m going to light this major fire but it’s okay because everyone’s going to get out safely”, Burston said.
“You can be sure that he did consciously appreciate the risks at the time he was setting the fire, the risk that death could well happen, that danger to life was likely.”
Burston is continuing to address the question of insanity this afternoon. The defence closing will follow later today or tomorrow.
Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 10 years.