Accused toddler killer Brendan Pallant had “no motive” to fatally injure a two-year-old child but the boy’s mother did, his lawyer has told a court.
Beginning his closing address to the Victorian Supreme Court on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Pallant’s barrister, Rishi Nathwani, said the case against his client had been “blinkered” from the start.
“This is a case, we say, that has been swept along by the tide of prejudice,” he said.
“He’s not guilty of murder, he did not have a motive.
“A lot of what you heard is defending Stacie Saggers; that’s because a lot of the evidence points to her, we say.”
The 36-year-old has been facing trial over the death of Ms Saggers’ two-year-old son, Jaidyn Gomes-Sebastiao, in the afternoon of September 2, 2019.
Prosecutors allege Mr Pallant attacked the child sometime between 12.26pm and 2.47pm, leaving him to die from a complex brain injury facedown in his bedroom.
It’s alleged Mr Pallant struck the toddler with the metal leg of a table in a “short but profound” bout of stress and frustration, caused by factors including a court date the same day.
“That day, Monday the 2nd, was a day that was stressing Mr Pallant out hard, to use his own words,” crown prosecutor Mark Gibson KC said.
The crown says it is no coincidence the injuries were appearing at a time when Mr Pallant was experiencing personal upset and stress.
“This is the context in which Jaidyn is killed. Brendan Pallant was the only adult home when Jaidyn Gomes-Sebastiao suffered his very significant brain injury.”
The jury was told Mr Pallant had moved into the family home less than a month earlier after he and Ms Saggers began dating, with her often leaving Jaidyn in the accused man’s care.
Mr Gibson told the court Ms Saggers, who is not accused of any wrongdoing, put Jaidyn down for a nap about midday before leaving for a cleaning job.
She returned home shortly before 3pm and her son’s body was discovered an hour later.
But Mr Nathwani argued the evidence showed Ms Saggers’ drug addiction was spiralling and her behaviour was becoming “increasingly erratic” in the lead up to Jaidyn’s death.
“I want you to ask who had the most significant stressors,” he said.
“Who had the motive? Whose child was the one that no one else would babysit? Whose drug use had gone up? Who needed money (to pay drug debts).”
Mr Nathwani pointed to a 22-minute window, between putting Jaidyn down for a nap and leaving for work, as a possible time Ms Saggers could have inflicted the fatal injuries.
“Is it possible Stacie Saggers inflicted the fatal blow, if you have a nagging doubt… you must acquit him,” he said.
He said Ms Saggers had shown a willingness to lie to paint herself in a particular picture and questioned why she texted her ex-husband saying; “he’s dead”, before the ambulance arrived.
Earlier on Tuesday, Mr Gibson said he anticipated Mr Nathwani would point the finger at Jaidyn’s mum injuring him after she “lost her cool”.
“We say September 2 was just like any other day (for Ms Saggers), it was not a catalyst for something as heinous as this,” he said.
“The perpetrator could not have been in any doubt that Jaidyn was seriously injured.
“This is not a case where Stacie could have left not knowing.”
He took the jury through evidence he says points to Ms Saggers’ “normal” frame of mind, including text messages and evidence from her cleaning client who said she was “chatty and seemed lovely”.
Mr Gibson said if the jury was not satisfied Mr Pallant intended to kill or really seriously injury Jaidyn, they could find him guilty on an alternative child homicide charge.
Mr Nathwani will continue delivering his closing remarks on Wednesday.
The trial, before Justice Jane Dixon, continues.
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7r7HWrGWcp51jrrZ7zZqroqeelrlwwsicq6iqmZZ8pLvUq6usZZyWxHCu0Z6lnZmeYr2iuMuapa1lnaq%2FpbHRZquroZGheq7BzGabopxdo7y1ecKopKahpGK1prXNqKysZZGpwaKvymamp2WjpLtuvNGoqp6bpam8s7%2BMrJiyZ56axLR50q2mq7FfmYCmscRump1tZmZ9p4GVnpxunWGbfnSuxWtqbJyWloE%3D