Benbow lawsuit: Expert throws out CCTV evidence

Evidence that police say shows Michael McGrath driving to a mate’s house where he was allegedly shot dead has been dismissed today by an expert defense witness.

Former Detective David Horsburgh reviewed hours of crucial CCTV footage that played a pivotal role in the murder trial of former prison officer David Benbow.

The Crown alleges that Benbow, 54, lured his construction buddy McGrath to his home in Candys Rd at 9am on May 22, 2017, to help him move some heavy railway sleepers.

It says Benbow shot him to death before attending a counseling session in town at 10:15 a.m. and later dumped his body, which was never found.

The High Court jury trial in Christchurch, which is nearing the end of its sixth week, has heard evidence that the Crown says McGrath is driving his dark blue 1994 Subaru Legacy station wagon on Wales St at 8.54am that day – reportedly on his way to Benbow’s.

Other footage from the local Halswell New World supermarket would drive past him again a minute later.

But today, licensed security consultant Horsburgh expressed doubts about the footage led by counsel Kirsten Gray.

The footage from Wales St at 8:54am shows McGrath’s dark blue car sporting its signature non-factory RFRB (Run Fast, Run Beautiful) grill – a Japanese aftermarket accessory – and headlights, police officers have told the court.

However, Horsburgh, who describes himself as a forensic video analyst, said the camera angle does not give a clear view of the front grill, while the resolution is “very poor”, making it “very difficult to examine the vehicle closely for differences in the nature of the grill design”.

“There isn’t enough information to draw that conclusion,” he said.

When asked about the color of the car, Horsburgh found it was “dirty brown – it’s not blue”. He also disagreed with police saying the car had a black cap in the center of the magnet wheels, just like McGrath’s car.

The defense witness also called the police’s conclusions about the supermarket footage “completely inaccurate and unreliable”.

While the cameras were of high quality, the car is shown 500 feet away and “by identification standards it falls way short of any image resolution to identify anything at that distance”.

While he agreed that the car was dark in color and “possibly blue”, there wasn’t enough information in the pixels to be sure it was blue.

During cross-examination, Prosecutor Barnaby Hawes questioned the qualifications of Horsburgh’s forensic video analyst, saying he found it “strange” that he had not played raw footage during his evidence today.

Cross-examination continues this afternoon.

Benbow’s lawyers previously warned the jury about “investigative bias” and “tunnel vision” by police early in the investigation, which they claim were trying to find evidence to support their case.

While the Crown accepts there is no body, no murder weapon and little forensic evidence in the case, it says there is a strong circumstantial case made up of many threads that, when taken together, show Benbow guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to the murder of McGrath.

The trial, before Judge Jonathan Eaton, continues.