Warning: This story contains evidence from the trial which some readers may find extremely upsetting.
The jury in the Lauren Dickason murder trial has begun their verdict deliberations.
The group, made up of eight women and four men, will decide whether she is guilty of murder, infanticide, or was insane at the time of the killings.
For four weeks, the jury heard extensive evidence from 30 witnesses. These included Graham Dickason, Lauren's mum, a close family member, friends in Timaru, first responders, doctors and a pathologist.
Five expert witnesses also took the stand, three summoned by the defence and two by the Crown, to give their opinion on Lauren's state of mind during the killings.
Now, the jury will decide the mum's fate.
"You are the judges of the facts in this case… it is for you to determine the facts and decide what has been proven," Justice Cameron Mander told the jury.
Justice Mander told the jury feelings of sympathy for the deceased children, Lauren, Graham and their family are understandable but they must set aside these feelings.
"You must reach your decision uninfluenced by prejudice and sympathy… It is understandable if not inevitable that such feelings are engendered in such a case which involves the deaths of three little children," Justice Mander said.
"You must set aside emotion and go about your task objectively and dispassionately, I can not stress that enough."
Lauren's three little girls - six-year-old Liané and two-year-old twins Maya and Karla - died at their Timaru home on the evening of September 16, 2021.
After her husband Graham Dickason left for a work function, Lauren killed the children before tucking them into bed. She then attempted suicide.
Lauren has admitted to killing her children but pleaded not guilty to murder.
But the Crown argues Lauren knew what she was doing was morally wrong and killed her children out of anger and control, therefore, she is guilty of murder.
"It is anger that explains the defendant's actions here - this was a long time brewing," Crown Prosecutor Andrew McRae told the jury during his closing address.
"As difficult as that conclusion might be, that is that the defendant is guilty of murder," McRae said.
It is up to the Crown to prove murder beyond reasonable doubt.
The Crown is not required to prove a motive to prove the offence of murder, only that the defendant had murderous intent.
It is not in dispute that Lauren killed Liané, Maya and Karla by asphyxiating them and that she intended to kill them.
Counsels agreed, subject to the partial defence of infanticide and the defence of insanity, if the deaths of the three children were acts of culpable homicide, they were acts of murder.
However, Lauren's defence is arguing insanity and infanticide - that she did not know killing her children was morally wrong.
"She decided to kill herself and also the girls and I suggest that is because she was so delusional and so disordered in her thinking… in her mind, it was the morally right thing to do," Defence lawyer Kerryn Beaton KC said in her closing address.
If the jury finds Lauren's actions in causing the death of her three children were acts of infanticide she can not be found guilty of murder.
New Zealand's law states infanticide is:
Where a woman causes the death of any child of hers under the age of 10 years in a manner that amounts to culpable homicide, and where the balance of her mind was disturbed, by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to that or any other child,... or by reason of any disorder consequent upon child birth…, to such an extent that she should not be held fully responsible, she is guilty of infanticide, and not of murder or manslaughter.
There is no dispute the balance of Lauren's mind was disturbed at the time she killed her children. What is in dispute is whether the disturbance of the mind was by reason of Lauren not having fully recovered from the effect of childbirth, or any consequence of childbirth, to such an extent that she should not be held fully responsible for her children's deaths.
Once the jury has decided whether Lauren is guilty of murder or infanticide, they must then decide whether she was sane at the time of the killings.
The defence alleged Lauren's actions were not only acts of infanticide but that she was insane at the time she killed her three children.
A person cannot be held criminally responsible for their actions if they were insane at the time they committed the acts that would otherwise be an offence, in this case, murder or infanticide.
Everyone is presumed to be sane at the time of the act, therefore, it is up to the defendant to prove on the balance of probabilities that they were insane when they committed the alleged crime.
It is not in dispute that Lauren was suffering from a disease of the mind at the time she killed her children. Lauren must prove she was so affected by that disease of the mind that she either did not understand the nature and quality of her actions or did not know they were morally wrong.
If this is proven, Lauren will be found not guilty on the grounds of insanity. In this case, Lauren would not be simply discharged, rather the judge, with the assistance of further medical advice, will decide the next course of action.
The jury is tasked to deliver one of four verdicts: Guilty of murder, not guilty of murder but guilty of infanticide, act of murder proven but not criminally responsible on account of insanity or act of infanticide proven but not criminally responsible on account of insanity.
The trial continues.
Where to find help and support:
- Shine (domestic violence) - 0508 744 633
- Women's Refuge - 0800 733 843 (0800 REFUGE)
- Need to Talk? - Call or text 1737
- What's Up - 0800 WHATS UP (0800 942 8787)
- Lifeline - 0800 543 354
- Youthline - 0800 376 633, text 234, email talk@youthline.co.nz or online chat
- Samaritans - 0800 726 666
- Depression Helpline - 0800 111 757
- Suicide Crisis Helpline - 0508 828 865 (0508 TAUTOKO)
- Shakti Community Council - 0800 742 584
