The six women and six men have heard seven days of evidence in the trial of Jamie Lee Warn (55), who denies the murder of Zsuzsanna Besenyei and two charges of perverting the course of justice.
On Tuesday both the prosecution and defence advocates gave their closing speeches to the court.
Mr Warn elected not to give evidence in his own defence.
However, his advocate, James Bell, argued there simply was not enough evidence that he killed the 37-year-old Hungarian, who had been living in Jersey for about seven years, for the jury to convict.
Advocate Bell said her death was ‘very sad but the jury could not be sure that she was killed’.
‘You cannot be sure she was killed by Jamie Warn,’ he said.
‘You cannot be sure Jamie Warn had an intent to kill her or cause serious bodily harm to her.’
Advocate Bell suggested that Mr Warn had no motive to kill Miss Besenyei and that the two were close enough for her to have listed him as her emergency contact at work.
He said there was no indication that either of them had wanted their relationship to end.
Advocate Bell urged the jurors to approach the CCTV evidence with caution, as ‘mistakes could be made’, and reminded them that the Home Office forensic pathologist who carried out Miss Besenyei’s post-mortem examination had been unable to determine a cause of death.
He said a number of prosecution witnesses could tell them little of how Miss Besenyei died. As the prosecution closed its case, however, Crown Advocate Simon Thomas said the jury should not dismiss circumstantial evidence.
He said that, if they looked at all the evidence, they could be confident that Jamie Lee Warn killed his secret lover and then tried to cover his tracks.
If the defendant did not kill Miss Besenyei, he must be ‘the unluckiest man on earth’, Crown Advocate Thomas said.
He suggested Mr Warn would have to have had a lookalike who also lived in the First Tower area and had a car that
looked just like Miss Besenyei’s blue Ford Fiesta.
That lookalike would have to have got hold of her phone and also the phone
of the defendant and travelled to the bank to withdraw money from Mr Warn’s account.
And then the mystery person would have had to have taken Mr Warn’s phone across the Island in the early hours of 14 May – the day her body was allegedly dumped at Le Pulec Bay and her car left on La Haule beach.
‘The defendant is not the victim of a horrible sequence of coincidences,’ Crown Advocate Thomas said. ‘It all points to him being responsible for the killing of Miss Besenyei and then taking steps to cover his actions in the days that followed.’
He said internet searches the defendant made on his phone gave clues as to his state of mind.
The day after she was was last seen alive – 10 May – Mr Warn was searching ‘how to turn off location services on an iPhone’ while enjoying drinks in the Earl Grey pub with his girlfriend.
Crown Advocate Thomas asked the jurors to consider the ‘powerful terms’ Mr Warn had used when he told police about Zsuzanna’s ex-boyfriend and the couple’s relationship. The prosecution suggested he was trying to cast suspicion on her former partner.
During the trial, the jury has heard evidence from over two dozen prosecution witnesses and two defence witnesses.
Deputy Bailiff Tim Le Cocq presided over the trial and was expected to give his summing up this morning.
