A Kiama man conspired to kill Dusan Kristic after two of his properties were firebombed, a court heard yesterday.
But Radomir Vukovic’s alleged role in the 2007 conspiracy was weak at best, and the prosecution was relying on one witness who had given multiple statements showing ‘‘collaboration’’, defence solicitor Rudolph Bergagnin said.
‘‘The case against this man has to be classed as a weak case. It may be viewed as a strong conspiracy but this man’s alleged involvement has to be on the bottom end,’’ Mr Bergagnin told Wollongong Local Court.
‘‘And as for a question of motive ... I don’t know where it is, but it’s not in any brief I’ve seen.’’
Vukovic is one of four people charged with conspiring to kill Mr Krstic – a year after two of Vukovic’s properties were firebombed, including one in Kiama Downs.
Police believe Mr Krstic, along with his alleged close associate Dragan Sekuljica were responsible.
Mr Sekuljica was the victim of the infamous 2007 Splashes nightclub shooting.
Vukovic is not charged in relation to the Splashes shooting.
Magistrate Michael Stoddart yesterday refused Vukovic’s bail application, despite the fact he had co-operated with police and had no prior record at the time of the alleged conspiracy.
‘‘The prosecution case relies heavily on the evidence of one particular witness,’’ Mr Stoddart said, making a non-publication order on the name of the witness.
‘‘That person has made a large number of statements in relation to this matter and the Splashes matter,’’ Mr Stoddart said.
‘‘A large consideration as far as the Crown is concerned is the protection and welfare of the community having regard to the nature and seriousness of the offence and this is a conspiracy to murder offence,’’ he said.
‘‘Quite clearly having regard to the seriousness of this matter, if Vukovic is convicted of this offence, clearly there would be a significant penalty imposed in my view.’’
Mr Stoddart said he accepted there were ‘‘variances in dates that don’t quite marry up’’ in the prosecution witnesses statements, but said the five-year gap between the time of the alleged offence and when the 12 statements were made may account for that.
‘‘The events are consistent, although the dates may not be, in relation to what is alleged to have been a conspiracy involving Mr Vukovic,’’ he said.
The case was adjourned to May.