Richard Satchwell's narrative about how his wife Tina died was farcical, implausible, self-serving and had more holes in it than a block of Swiss cheese, the jury in his trial has been told.
Mr Satchwell has pleaded not guilty to the murder of his wife in March 2017.
Prosecuting counsel, Gerardine Small, said Mr Satchwell was "shamelessly brazen" right to the point that his wife’s remains were found buried under the stairs in their home in October 2023.
He told gardaí he stored "bits and pieces" in the area and had no idea what was behind the concrete.
When Tina's remains were found, Ms Small said you would have expected a "road to Damascus" but she said that was not the case.
Instead she said he embarked on another narrative which was another web of deceit.
She said this new narrative was laden with discrepancies and had more holes than a block of swiss cheese. She said it was totally implausible and self-serving.
She said Mr Satchwell had described Ms Satchwell as someone who could hold her own if she was attacked. But she said it was very curious that Tina had not managed to "scratch, scraub, bruise or draw blood" during the struggle between an eight stone woman and the 6ft2" tall man who was considerably heavier.
Ms Small told the seven women and five men on the jury that this was a case screaming out for their common sense and their experience of life.
She said the prosecution had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Satchwell killed his wife unlawfully and at the time had the requisite intent.
Ms Small said the jury could infer his intent from the surrounding circumstances and his actions at the time and in the aftermath. She said they should look at his reactions, omissions, the lies he told, the manner in which he concealed the body and the whole web of deceit he wove.
She said it was not until Tina’s remains were found that his narrative changed.
Prosecuting counsel tells court Satchwell 'conniving'
Although the prosecution does not have to prove motive, Ms Small said the jurors may feel it is relevant that Mr Satchwell had said on many occasions that his wife was threatening to leave him and had been claiming that she had wasted 28 years with him.
She reminded the jury that Mr Satchwell had not sought medical help for his wife after she slumped in his arms, on his account. Instead she said, he had created a false email to an international monkey rescue association saying his wife was going to leave him over their difficulties in buying two monkeys. He later sent a text in a similar vein.
She said it was very calculated, deliberate, reasoned move on his behalf to create a digital footprint that he could avail of later down the line to say she was alive at that stage. She described Mr Satchwell as "conniving and full of guile".
Ms Small said he had then put leads on the dogs, changed his clothes and went to the post office to collect their dole while his wife was dead in the sitting room.
Four days later, she said Mr Satchwell went to Fermoy and went to Tina’s aunt and uncle to ask them if they had seen her. She said it was astounding that he had gone to those lengths, in circumstances where he knew full well that at stage she was actually in the freezer.
She said the allegation that Tina had taken €25,000 from the house was another big lie. And she said in May 2017, he built upon the lies by introducing the issues of depression, violence and Tina having a short fuse.
Ms Small said Mr Satchwell continued with his fabricated narrative and engaged with the media - to do interviews with anyone who would indulge him, in which he appealed for Tina to come home.
Ms Small said he had introduced issues in Tina's family in his interviews with gardaí - she said the jurors may feel they were introduced as a distraction.
She said they may feel the same about the cross examination of gardaí in relation to the first search of the Satchwell home in June 2017.
She described Mr Satchwell's suggestion in an interview that his wife might come knocking on the door with another man, "absolutely callous", when she said he knew full well she was buried under the concrete.
Satchwell an 'arch manipulator' in garda interviews - Prosecuting counsel
Ms Small described Mr Satchwell as an "arch manipulator" in his garda interviews. She said he came up with a narrative that beggared belief but did not want to answer questions.
She said the way the dressing gown belt had ended up in the position it was found in on Ms Satchwell’s body did not make sense on his narrative and said his account did not explain how glass found on her remains had got there.
She said the way he had buried Ms Satchwell was absolutely disrespectful and was in stark contrast to the respect he showed the remains of their dog Heidi when she died.
She said he was cynical in offering Ms Satchwell’s cousin, Sarah, the freezer her beloved cousin had been in and the manner in which he sought her assistance in identifying clothes was incredibly callous.
Ms Small said the objective by Mr Satchwell was always to put everyone off the scent. He was full of guilt, cunning and a plethora of lies because he knew what he had done.
She said it was nonsense to suggest that this was an accident or self defence and she urged the jury to return the appropriate verdict of guilty of murder.
Prosecution's case a 'big contradiction' - Defence counsel
Defence counsel Brendan Grehan told the jury that the prosecution case was a "big contradiction". He said there was no doubt that Mr Satchwell was guilty of causing his wife’s death, of burying her under the stairs, of disreputable conduct and of lying to everyone. But he said that did not make him a murderer.
He said the prosecution had no evidence that Mr Satchwell had intended to kill or cause serious injury to Ms Satchwell. And he said people lied for lots of reasons.
He told the jury they had to be cold and clinical and could not allow themselves to be overwhelmed by the many lies Mr Satchwell told and allow that to lead them to the easy conclusion that he must be guilty of murder.
Mr Grehan said the fact that Mr Satchwell kept up the lie until the end did not change the way they had to look at and assess the situation.
He said it was clear Mr Satchwell was besotted and obsessed with his wife and once they married, he spent the rest of her life devoted to her.
He said Mr Satchwell said she beat him on occasion, sometimes badly. He said the prosecution claimed this was something he said afterwards and was a lie.
But Mr Grehan asked if the roles were reversed and Ms Satchwell was charged with murder, would they be so quick to condemn her for not mentioning the violence in their joint doctors’ visits.
He said the fact that they always attended the doctor together was highly unusual and smacked of control. But he asked, who was controlling whom?
He said there was not a scintilla of evidence that Mr Satchwell had ever laid a hand on Ms Satchwell.
Satchwell put up with 'occasional Jekyll and Hyde', court told
He seemed to put up with the occasional Jekyll and Hyde flash of temper because he loved her so much.
He said the evidence about violence showed that she could suddenly turn violent which is what he said happened on 20 March 2017.
Mr Grehan said the prosecution had glossed over the biggest elephant in the room - the failures of An Garda Siochána in the case.
He said he accepted Mr Satchwell was the author of the greatest delay in the case which meant that the cause of Ms Satchwell’s death could not be determined. But he said there was more than enough blame to go around.
He asked what a different case it might have been if the investigation had been done as it could have been and he said there was not really any good explanation for it.
He said Mr Satchwell could not benefit from the delay in finding Ms Satchwell’s body but he could not be punished for it.
Mr Grehan said Mr Satchwell’s response after being charged of "guilty, not guilty – guilty" was somewhat cryptic but it had not been recorded on video, its tone could not be gauged. He urged the jury to leave it to one side.
He said Mr Satchwell had been made to do a "perp walk" by gardaí when he was brought to court after being charged.
He was handcuffed at the front and paraded into the courtroom. He said a photograph showing Mr Satchwell surrounded by gardaí and looking down was like the Caravaggio painting "The Taking of Christ", except it was the "taking of Richard Satchwell".
He said it was the fomenting of public opinion to show Mr Satchwell was a dangerous man that had been brought to justice and to urge people not to look too hard behind why it took so long for that to happen.
Mr Grehan pointed to the fact that the post-mortem examination of Ms Satchwell’s remains showed there were no fractures anywhere on her body.
He said there was no explanation as to how the belt of the robe ended up in the position it was found in or about where the glass on her body came from.
He said far from being a criminal mastermind, Mr Satchwell left a trail of breadcrumbs that would rival anything in a nursery tale.
He said it was appropriate for the jury to decide what exactly it was he was guilty of beyond lying and disgraceful behaviour after his wife died.
He claimed the prosecution wanted the jury to focus on what he did afterwards because they could not make the case of intent beforehand.
Mr Grehan outlined three possible verdicts for the jury. They could find Mr Satchwell guilty of murder, or they could acquit him if they accepted he believed he was under serious threat from his wife at the time and that he acted reasonably.
If they found that he used more force than was reasonably necessary but no more than he believed was necessary, he said the appropriate verdict was manslaughter.
He said they were not there to give a certificate of good character to Mr Satchwell but to determine if the prosecution had proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt. And he urged them to come to a just verdict in the case.
Mr Justice Paul McDermott will begin charging the jurors - summarising the evidence and outlining the law on Monday. The jury will then begin considering its verdict.
