Lauren Dickason trial: Jury finds mum guilty of murdering her three children in majority verdict

Brian from Mount Roskill

The jury reached a majority verdict.
Dickason stood in the dock calmly as she was convicted of three counts of murder. She was taken out of the courtroom while Justice Cameron Mander discharged the jury. As the jurors left court some broke down weeping.
“This has been a difficult and a gruelling trial,” the judge told them.
“You’ve had to deal with distressing evidence, this trial has likely taken a toll on your personally. You have made a considerable sacrifice.
“Your contribution will remain unknown and largely unsung, you can take considerable pride in the way you have carried out your duties.”
Dickason’s parents sat in the public gallery calmly. Her mother stared at the floor. Members of the public who had been in court for the whole trial comforted Dickason’s parents.
As the hearing ended Dickason’s lawyers also both burst into tears.
Dickason now faces a life sentence for the murder of each child. A sentencing date will be set for the convicted killer this afternoon.
Justice Mander said remanding Dickason in prison would be inappropriate at this time given she was under a compulsory treatment order.
He said he sought expert reports on her mental state and what sentence will be appropriate for her. As Dickason was taken out of court for the last time after the trial, the triple murderer shook her head.
Just after 3pm today, the jury indicated it had reached a verdict.
The jury had been deliberating since 1.55pm on Monday.
This afternoon the jury of eight women and four men indicated they had a question and returned to court soon after.
Justice Mander was told the group had been unable to reach a unanimous verdict and asked for instruction.
He told them that if they could not all agree - he would accept a majority verdict at this stage of deliberations.
In criminal cases, after a jury has deliberated for at least four hours and has not reached a unanimous verdict the judge may instruct them to consider a majority verdict.
A majority verdict is a verdict agreed to by all except one juror and can only occur if the foreperson states in open court there is no probability of the jury reaching a unanimous verdict, as the Juries Act stipulates.
“It is possible for you to deliver a verdict that 11 of you agree on... if only one of your number is in disagreement... then you may proceed to verdict,” he said.
“You should keep trying to reach unanimity until it is not likely for that to happen.”
The jury has again retired to keep deliberating.
Lauren Anne Dickason allegedly killed 6-year-old Liané, and 2-year-old twins Maya and Karla at their Timaru home on September 16.
Lauren Anne Dickason allegedly killed 6-year-old Liané, and 2-year-old twins Maya and Karla at their Timaru home on September 16.
The eight women and four men - selected on July 17 for this trial - retired at 1.55pm on Monday after Justice Mander gave a lengthy summing up of the case against the accused - and her defence.
They must now decide on Dickason’s fate and have four final options:
=====================================================
Guilty of murder
Guilty of the lesser alternative charge of infanticide
Act of murder proven but not guilty by reason of insanity
Act of infanticide proven but not guilty by reason of insanity
If found guilty of murder Dickason faces life in a New Zealand prison.
=======================================================
If the jury reaches a verdict of infanticide she could be jailed for a maximum of three years.
If her defence of insanity is accepted Justice Mander would then have to consider making an order detaining her as a special patient at a psychiatric unit.
That order would be in place until the national director of mental health is satisfied she is mentally well enough for release.
Details of Justice Mander’s summary - including direction on how the jury should approach deliberations and what they should consider - are below.
The jury were sent to begin their formal decision-making process at 1.55pm and immediately requested to re-watch the video of Dickason’s police interview, conducted the day after the alleged murders.
The trial is now in its fifth week.
Dickason, 42, does not deny killing Liane, 6, and 2-year-old twins Maya and Karla in September 2021.
But she has pleaded not guilty to murder, claiming she was severely mentally disturbed at the time and did not know what she was doing was morally wrong - and that she should not be held criminally responsible.
Justice Mander appreciated much of what he had to cover would be repetitive however he was “obliged to ensure” the jury understood the case against Dickason and her defence.
Mander reminded the jury it was up to them, and them alone, as to what evidence they accepted and rejected.
“At the end of the day your assessment of the evidence is for you,” he said.
“It is up to you as to how you assess it... it’s for you to judge.
‘You need to take into account the evidence as a whole... does it make sense, does it ring true?
“You must reach your decision without feelings of prejudice or sympathy… it is inevitable such feelings are engendered in a case involving three little children.
“You must set aside your emotions and go about your task dispassionately. You must judge the defendant without fear or favour - feelings of sympathy for the three children, Mrs Dickason, Mr Dickason and their families… must be put to one side.
“An entirely human response to three little girls being killed is outrage and horror - but you must put those reactions and feelings to one side in order to carry out your task in the analytical way that is required of you; to make sure your verdicts are based on the law and the evidence.”
Justice Mander said the jury must ignore any media reports or comments made to them by anyone outside their number about the case.
He said they must return verdicts based on their assessment of the evidence alone and urged them to “be on your guard” and not allow any irrelevant information or outside influence to colour their thinking.
“Mrs Dickason is innocent until proven guilty,” he said.
“It is for the Crown to prove the charge of murder and to negate the defence of infanticide… there is no onus on the defendant to prove or disprove insanity… or infanticide.
“You must be brought to the point that you can say ‘I am sure the defendant is guilty’... has the Crown proved beyond a responsible doubt that… the children’s deaths were not an act of infanticide.”
Justice Mander said there was no doubt Dickason killed the little girls and that she was very mentally unwell.
The jury must decide whether she was so disturbed that she cannot be held criminally culpable.
The jury’s verdict options were murder, the alternative charge or “partial defence” of infanticide or the full defence of insanity and Justice Mander spent much time talking them through each.
================================================
www.nzherald.co.nz...
=================================================