Summary:
This case involves Clinton Beau Wrigley, a 40-year-old farmworker accused of murdering 58-year-old farmer Joel Carter in January 2023. Wrigley has pleaded not guilty to the charges, and the trial is currently taking place in the NSW Supreme Court. Prosecutors claim that Carter was killed with a rubber mallet while he slept, suffering severe blunt force trauma, with repeated blows to the head.
According to allegations presented to the jury, Wrigley made chilling comparisons about the murder, claiming it was akin to putting down a pet dog. Days after the incident, he purportedly recounted the attack, stating, "I was hitting him and brains were just flying everywhere," and likened it to hitting his dog after it had been shot by police in 2012.
The murder allegedly occurred late on January 22 or early the next day. Carter’s son, Luke, discovered his father’s body two days later, finding it in a significantly decomposed state. A police examination revealed multiple skull fractures and lacerations on the victim’s head.
Prosecutor Michelle Swift informed the jury that while the precise murder weapon remains unknown, Wrigley reportedly admitted to using a rubber mallet, which he claimed to have disposed of by destroying it inside Carter’s burning vehicle. At the time of his death, Carter had a farm-share arrangement with Wrigley’s employer, who had hired him as both a farmhand and truck driver.
On the night of the alleged murder, records indicated Wrigley stated he was searching for a stolen quad bike. The next morning, he asked his boss for a ride close to where a burnt-out Hilux was found, and his employer noticed blood stains on Wrigley’s clothing, alongside his attempts to avoid being seen by others.
While no clear motive for the murder has yet been disclosed, the defence suggests Wrigley had no involvement in any criminal activities related to the murder, theft of Carter’s vehicle, or arson. Wrigley’s barrister contended that he did not kill Carter and instead highlighted the tensions between his boss and Carter, suggesting that his employer may have been involved in the altercation.
As the case progresses, both parties dispute the validity of Wrigley’s alleged confessions and the circumstances surrounding the crime. The trial continues.