Woman drugged and suffocated husband, Crown claims

[Updated report] The Crown alleges a 50-year-old woman was caught out by the web of lies she told when she drugged and probably suffocated her husband and claimed he had committed suicide.

“She was unable to maintain a consistent story,” said Crown prosecutor Kathy Basire as she opened the case against Helen Elizabeth Milner, who denies charges of attempted murder and murder of her husband, Phillip James Nisbet, who died in May 2009.

Milner’s three-week trial has begun before Justice David Gendall and a jury in the High Court at Christchurch. The Crown will call evidence from 72 witnesses.

The Crown alleges Milner bought drugs from pharmacies under false names, fabricated three suicide messages by her husband, and made up a story about the cause of his suicide – telling people falsely that tests showed Mr Nisbet’s son was not his biological son.

Mrs Basire told the jury of Milner’s alleged lies during an opening address in which she claimed the woman had been unhappy with her husband and her marriage, and had wanted to claim on a $250,000 insurance police on her husband’s life. The policy’s non-suicide clause had expired a few weeks before the death.

She said Milner and Mr Nisbet had married in 2005. She was an office worker while he was a truck driver. By 2009 she was concerned that if they separated, she would lose her half interest in the house. She alleged that Mr Nisbet was living beyond his means and spending her money, but inquiries showed it was actually the other way around.

The Crown alleges that Milner knew he had a bad reaction to the drug Phenergan which was used as an anti-histamine, or a sedative.

Mrs Basire detailed three purchases of the drug at pharmacies where details were recorded. In each case, the purchases were made by a woman who paid cash, and gave a false name and address, or details linked to Milner or someone she knew.

In each case, Milner’s bank card was used in other shops or automatic teller machines in the area of the pharmacies about the time of the purchases.

She said that after calling police to say she had found her husband dead in bed, she had waited till they arrived, and turned on her cellphone to receive a text message from him that was a suicide note. The Crown alleges that she had sent it from his cellphone.

It also alleges she showed family members a typed suicide note that she found later, with his signature. When the man’s sister said it did not look like his signature, she produced another note with a typed signature, which she handed to the police.

The Crown case is that she drugged him twice with the pills on or about April 15, 2009, but he recovered. She had hoped that he might die, or have a crash during his work as a driver.

On May 4, 2009, the Crown alleges, she fed him a stronger dose with his evening meal. The Crown case that she then suffocated him while he was sedated.

She then told lies about how he was upset to learn that his son was not his biological son – which was not true – and that he had a sleep disorder and was worried that he would have to give up his job. That was also not true.

Mrs Basire told of her offering a son $20,000 from the insurance money if she would get rid of her husband. The son had declined.

Mr Nisbet showed no signs of difficulty or depression on the weekend of his death, when he spent time with his son.

She said: “The Crown says both (typed suicide notes) are complete frauds written by the defendant to explain why an otherwise happy and reasonably content 47-year-old man would choose to take his own life.”

Mrs Basire said the defence case would be that it was reasonably possible that Mr Nisbet had taken his own life.

She said family members would give evidence of being told differing and inconsistent stories by Milner about how Mr Nisbet had died.

She said it was a circumstantial case, but such cases could be overwhelming when the “combined threads” were put together. “The Crown says this is an overwhelming circumstantial case,” she told the jury.

[Update: Afternoon evidence] A workmate of Milner’s from 2006, Chantelle Janine Allen, said Milner had told her that she believed her husband was being unfaithful. They stayed in contact after Milner left the firm, and emails were read out describing Milner’s relationship issues with Mr Nisbet. She said she had no respect for him, and was concerned about the situation he had put them in.

The woman said she got a text telling her of Mr Nisbet’s death. Milner told her that had had a sleep disorder, and had seen a doctor to get medication. She believed his death was connected with the disorder.

A work colleague at another firm, Lynette Marie Maynard, said Milner often spoke of her private life. She commented that she had arranged with her lawyer that if her marriage split up, her husband would not be entitled to any part of the house. Her attitude to her husband fluctuated, but she was usually critical and complaining about him. She had seemed “a little bit obsessed” with money.

Mrs Maynard confirmed, during the defence cross-examination, that Milner had been convicted of theft as a servant while she was employed at that firm. An email by Mrs Maynard referring to her guilty plea was produced as a defence exhibit.

The trial is continuing.

Category: News