Evidence in Natalie McNally murder trial points to ‘some other killer’ – defence

By Jonathan McCambridge, Press Association

The evidence in the trial of a man accused of murdering Natalie McNally points towards “some other killer”, a jury has been told.

Delivering his closing submissions at Belfast Crown Court, defence barrister John Kearney KC said the case against Stephen McCullagh is “dependent upon circumstantial evidence”.

McNally, 32, was 15 weeks’ pregnant when she was beaten and stabbed at her home in Lurgan on December 18th 2022.

Her partner, Stephen McCullagh, 36, of Woodland Gardens in Lisburn, is on trial accused of murdering her.

He has denied the charge.

The jury of six men and six women was told on Thursday they would have to decide their verdict on all of the evidence in the case.

Kearney said the “devil is in the detail” of the evidence.

He said: “There are some inconvenient, troubling, nagging, not unreasonable doubt pieces that do not fit the prosecution case.

“There are multiple pieces of this circumstantial jigsaw that point not towards the defendant, but we would suggest point away from him towards some other killer.”

If you are left with a reasonable doubt that someone else could have been the killer your job is to acquit.

He added: “We ask you to scratch the surface from the superficial points to those matters we suggest will be niggling and nagging reasonable doubts in this case.”

Kearney said the defendant was entitled to the presumption of innocence.

He added that McCullagh had not given evidence during the trial and the jury did not have to “hold that against” him.

He said the jury was also entitled to take into account the “state of the evidence” against the defendant.

The barrister said the failure of McCullagh to give evidence “doesn’t make an unproven case proven”.

He added: “It doesn’t get the prosecution to their end line on its own.”

Kearney said it was a “classic circumstantial case, dependent upon circumstantial evidence”.

He said there is no eyewitness evidence and there was only McNally and her killer in the house on the night she was murdered.

The barrister said the jury had to have no reasonable doubt that McCullagh was the killer before they could convict.

He said: “When you come to this critically important decision on the identity of the killer, if you think he probably is the killer: not enough. If you are almost sure he is the killer: not enough.

“If you are left with a reasonable doubt that someone else could have been the killer your job is to acquit.”

Kearney turned to CCTV evidence presented by the prosecution.

He said a “big problem” for the prosecution was the absence of CCTV showing McCullagh leaving his house in Lisburn on the night McNally was killed.

He said: “If the prosecution case is right, he should have been picked up leaving his house and he wasn’t.”

The barrister then discussed a former boyfriend of McNally, who cannot be named due to a reporting restriction, but who gave evidence during the trial.

Kearney said the former partner was the “personification of reasonable doubt” in this case.

He said: “He is walking, talking reasonable doubt.”

He said McCullagh had always believed the ex-boyfriend was the killer.

The trial continues.