Hooded intruders captured on home CCTV shooting at a naked former bikie boss may have opened fire in self-defence, rather than as part of a calculated assassination plot, a leading barrister has suggested.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Murugan Thangaraj SC raised the possibility on Monday in the ACT Supreme Court, where his client Axel Sidaros is fighting allegations including that he attempted to murder former Canberra Comanchero commander Peter Zdravkovic.
Mr Sidaros has pleaded not guilty to seven charges linked to a June 2018 incident, in which a group of disguised people entered Zdravkovic's Calwell property, shot off part of a finger on the man's left hand and set three cars on fire.
The junior Comanchero bikie was previously found guilty by a jury of the same offences, but successfully appealed earlier this year and was granted a judge-alone retrial for reasons that cannot be published.
Shortly before the retrial began on Monday, Mr Thangaraj told the court that Mr Sidaros' defence remained that he was not one of the four hooded figures seen on the CCTV.
The prominent silk also said that if Justice David Mossop came to the conclusion that Mr Sidaros was among the group, guilty verdicts would not automatically follow on all counts.
"Self-defence is an obvious issue," he said, claiming the intruders may not have been intending to kill Zdravkovic and the former bikie boss might have shot at them first.
Mr Thangaraj made those comments during an unsuccessful attempt to have Justice Mossop disqualify himself from presiding over the matter.
He took issue with a number of findings the judge previously made in sentencing Zdravkovic on weapons charges linked to the same incident, saying they were inconsistent with arguments he might make in this case.
The findings included that Zdravkovic, nude after getting out of the shower, had only shot at the intruders with a rifle after the trespassers had opened fire first.
Mr Thangaraj said Mr Sidaros was concerned it would be hard, if not impossible, for Justice Mossop to now accept a conflicting version of events.
But Justice Mossop declined to recuse himself, saying he was capable of putting any previous findings to one side and deciding this matter purely on the evidence put before him.
Once that issue had been resolved, Crown prosecutor Trent Hickey said his case was that the four intruders had gone to Zdravkovic's home with "a clear purpose".
He played CCTV footage that showed the intruders pouring petrol around the property and shooting into the house, then setting the accelerant alight and fleeing the scene.
Addressing the question of motive, Mr Hickey told Justice Mossop the assailants had targeted Zdravkovic in the context of a dispute between outlaw bikies.
He said the Comancheros' Canberra chapter was divided at the time in question, with Zdravkovic having left the gang and burnt his "colours" in a highly provocative display.
As a result of the dispute, Mr Hickey said, threats began circulating on social media and Zdravkovic was warned a "hit squad" would come to his house if he did not meet certain demands.
When Zdravkovic did not relent, the prosecutor claimed, Mr Sidaros and three "unknown" co-offenders followed through on the threats and tried to kill him.
Mr Hickey said no single thing inextricably tied Mr Sidaros to the scene, but several pieces of circumstantial evidence would ultimately prove his guilt when considered as a whole.
These included that the shotgun used by one of the intruders was consistent with one owned by Mr Sidaros, who had expressed "loyalty and devotion" to the man who had succeeded Zdravkovic as chapter commander.
The retrial, which is expected to take two weeks, continues.
