Judge in trial of Rajwinder Singh, accused of Toyah Cordingley's 2018 murder, giving jury final instructions

A judge has told jurors they do not need to consider a motive in deciding whether a former nurse is guilty of the murder of Cairns woman Toyah Cordingley.

The 24-year-old's body was found buried at a shallow depth in sand at Wangetti Beach, north of Cairns, the morning after she had gone there to walk her dog Indie, in October 2018.

Rajwinder Singh, 41, has pleaded not guilty to her murder.

Justice Lincoln Crowley has begun giving final instructions to the jury ahead of their deliberations, at the end of an almost four-week trial at the Supreme Court in Cairns.

The Crown relies on a combination of circumstantial evidence to establish Mr Singh's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

That includes the high likelihood of Mr Singh's DNA being found on items where Ms Cordingley was buried, the movements of his car matching those of Ms Cordingley's phone away from the beach, his having had the time to dispose of items connected to the crime, and the way he fled the country the next morning — leaving behind his wife, three young children and parents — to spend four years hiding in his homeland India.

The defence has argued much of the case against Mr Singh relies on things that did not make sense and that a lone assailant could not have overpowered Ms Cordingley and her large dog.

They have also pointed to the existence of several people in the community with knives, a propensity for violence and a history of mental illness or drug abuse.

No need to prove motive

Justice Crowley said for Mr Singh to be found guilty in a circumstantial case, it was necessary for prosecutors to prove that him being the killer was a rational inference, and to exclude all other possibilities.

However, the judge said the prosecution did not need to prove Mr Singh had a motive to kill Ms Cordingley.

"Motive is immaterial to the question of criminal responsibility," Justice Crowley said.

The court has heard Mr Singh, who lived in Innisfail, and Ms Cordingley, an animal shelter volunteer and health store worker, did not know one another.

Among the evidence presented at the trial was a recording of a conversation Mr Singh had with an undercover police officer in a watch house cell.

In that conversation, the court heard Mr Singh tell the officer he saw "killers" with "covered" faces commit the murder at Wangetti Beach, that he feared they could kill him too and so he fled to India, where he learnt he was a wanted man.

Justice Crowley said it was up to the jury to decide whether Mr Singh said those things, and whether he was telling the truth.

"The prosecution has to exclude the defendant's statements as reasonable possibilities," he said.

Even if they did not believe Mr Singh's version of events, Justice Crowley told the jury they "must not jump to automatically conclude that the defendant killed Ms Cordingley".

"You must not reason that way."

'No emotion' in decision

Justice Crowley gave the jury directions about how to consider the circumstances of Mr Singh's flight to India.

"Before you can use his departure as indicative of his guilt … you first have to find the reason why he left was because he was the killer, and knew he was guilty, and not for some other reason," Justice Crowley said.

"People do not always act rationally and conduct of this kind can often be explained in other ways."

Prosecutors have relied on DNA evidence in their case against Mr Singh, including a sample found on a stick at Ms Cordingley's makeshift grave, which forensic scientists determined to be 3.7 billion times more likely to have come from Mr Singh than not.

Justice Crowley said that evidence was expressed as a likelihood ratio and "not absolute proof".

He also told jurors that whether they accepted the timing advance evidence prosecutors relied on to establish the movements of Ms Cordingley's phone was "an important factual matter you must decide in this case".

Mr Singh elected not to call or give evidence in his defence at trial — something Justice Crowley said could not be used against him or to "fill in any gaps" in the Crown case.

Jurors were told to consider their verdict without any prejudice toward the accused or sympathy for him.

"No such emotion has any part to play in your decision, nor should you allow public opinion to influence you," Justice Crowley said.

The jury is due to retire to consider its verdict once Justice Crowley finishes summing up the case.