An Auckland resident, Susana Makerita Leota-Lu, 37, has entered a not guilty plea to the charges of murder. Her defence team revolves their case around the claim of self-defence, in spite of the grievous tally of 94 stab wounds sustained by the victim, some purportedly inflicted post-mortem.
The incident transpired in the early hours of September 3 last year, invoking a desperate call to the police by a neighbour, alarmed by horrific screams and pleas for help emanating from the seventh floor of Lakewood Plaza – Manukau’s crown residential skyscraper. Responding to this distress call, police apprehended Leota-Lu at the bloody scene, where her hands were literally stained red with culpability. As revealed by Crown prosecutor Anna Devathasan, two knives, witnesses to this atrocious act, were discovered in the deceased, Samantha Bridgette Antoinette Whitehouse, on arrival of law enforcement.
After an initial, futile attempt to thwart the police from entering, Leota-Lu allegedly conceded, “There’s a body in there.” The subsequent search yielded two more blood-stained knives and Whitehouse’s cellphone in her possession.
The court was informed of Leota-Lu’s precedent of violent behaviour from her time in Australia, where she was convicted in 2018 for a knife assault on a roommate. The interaction between defendant Leota-Lu and victim Whitehouse was reported as being cursory at best. They happened to cross paths on the afternoon preceding the deadly incident and spent the evening in each other’s company. Information presented to the jurors imparted that their evening involved methamphetamine use and disagreements over Leota-Lu’s misplaced phone.
Leota-Lu’s initial statements to the police were an admittance of guilt, with her stating that she “did it” because Whitehouse “deserves it”. She asserted, “That’s what happens when you f*** with my family.” While initially admitting to have harmed herself, as the events of the morning unwound, she began to attribute the injuries to Whitehouse and cite self-defence.
Her recorded police interview revealed divergent narratives. While she claimed to have been under attack and acted in self-defence, she also admitted to barring Whitehouse from exiting the apartment. Devathasan accentuated the points of inconsistency and lack of coherence to Leota-Lu’s claim of self-defence. Devathasan further berated, “These things do not sound like self-defence,” categorizing it as a crime of violent, rage-imbued aggression.
In response, defence attorney Kim Holden asserted Leota-Lu’s state of disarray following the traumatic events and the after-effects of methamphetamine consumption during her interview with the police, as the crucial factors to consider while evaluating her inconsistent statements.
Holden stated, “There is a defence to this case,” arguing the initial onus of aggression was on Whitehouse and circumstantially, Leota-Lu’s injuries were acts of self-defence. The defence team is due to present their arguments following the Crown’s concluding evidence presentation.
