Jury told to consider ‘different strands’ of evidence in Natalie McNally murder case

By Jonathan McCambridge, Press Association

The jury in the Natalie McNally murder trial has been told they must deliver their verdict based on consideration of “different strands” of circumstantial evidence in the case.

Judge Kinney has been delivering his charge to the jury at Belfast Crown Court in the trial of murder accused Stephen McCullagh.

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

Her partner and the father of her unborn baby – McCullagh, 36, of Woodland Gardens in Lisburn – is on trial accused of murdering her.

He has denied the charge.

During the four-week trial, the prosecution has claimed that McCullagh murdered McNally after setting up a “false alibi” that he was livestreaming a video gaming session on YouTube.

The defence has instead asserted that a former boyfriend of McNally, who cannot be named, was responsible for her murder.

Judge Kinney told the jury on Friday they would have to decide the case on all of the evidence delivered in the trial.

He said: “If you are firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt of the offence charged, you must find him guilty.

“On the other hand, you think there is a real possibility he is not guilty you must give him the benefit of the doubt and find him not guilty.”

The judge said there had been a considerable amount of evidence in the case about McNally’s former partner, but reminded the jury that he is not the defendant and should not be the focus of their deliberations.

He added: “The defendant is Stephen McCullagh, you must determine if Stephen McCullagh is guilty of the murder of Natalie McNally.”

The judge said there was no issue between the prosecution and defence that McNally had been murdered.

He said there was no evidence in McNally’s home about who had committed the murder.

He said the prosecution instead relied on circumstantial evidence.

Judge Kinney said: “You must examine each of the different strands of circumstantial evidence that the prosecution rely on.

“You must decide which of those strands you accept and which you do not.”

He added: “Weigh all of the evidence up and decide if the prosecution has made you sure that the defendant is guilty.

“You must decide if all of the evidence, considered together, has proved the case against him.

“Circumstantial evidence can be considered as strands of a rope.

“One strand would not be sufficient to prove the case but a number of strands taken together may be of sufficient strength to prove the case.”

The judge said the defence had pointed to WhatsApp messages between McNally and McCullagh as evidence of a “loving relationship”, as well as evidence about her relationship with her former boyfriend.

The judge reminded the jury that McCullagh had not given evidence in his own defence during the proceedings.

Judge Kinney then began to review the evidence which has been delivered during the four-week trial.