SUBMISSIONS from the prosecution in the trial of a man accused of murdering his wife were heard on Thursday.

In the latest part in the trial of 44-year-old Stephen McKinney, who is accused of – and denies – murdering his wife, 35-year-old Lu Na McKinney, during a family boating holiday to Lough Erne in Fermanagh four years ago in April, 2017, Richard Weir QC began his submissions by giving the jury his definition of what murder was.

In this particular case, Mr. Weir claimed it involved McKinney doing an act intending either to kill his wife, or to cause her serious harm, resulting in her death.

The prosecutor went further, claiming that having reviewed all of the evidence, the evidence would lead them to accept McKinney was guilty of Lu Na's murder, and established to the necessary standard his guilt.

Mr. Weir accepted their case was a circumstantial one, and that the Crown could not say precisely how she met her death, or what her husband allegedly did to cause her to be in the lough.

The reason for this, he said, was simply because the only eyewitness to what occurred was McKinney himself.

Murders were often carried out in secret, or in private, he added, and in some cases a body was never recovered or the cause of death established, but even in such cases guilty verdicts had been recorded.

The prosecutor repeated again that while the defendant was the only person who knew what had happened, and the case against him was circumstantial, such was its strength of it, the jury would be drawn to the only conclusion: that McKinney committed the crime he is accused of.

Having reviewed the evidence of how the family came to be out on the Lower Lough – an Easter treat for the children, and to celebrate the couple's up and coming 14th wedding anniversary – counsel said other reasons were also given, including a new job.

Following a short break, McKinney's two 999 calls to emergency services were then played to the jury in full, prompting Mr. Weir to describe them as extraordinary not only in tone, but in what was said of how Mrs. McKinney came to be in the water.

Mr. Weir said the 999 call initially had husband and wife on the jetty when she allegedly fell into the water. The lawyer then asked of the jury why then should McKinney jump into the water after his wife, when there was a life belt and a boat hook all to hand?

Counsel said, in the call, McKinney claimed that following his attempts at rescue, he could not see his wife in the water, while according to police who arrived at the scene, Lu Na's body was practically touching the back of the boat.

Had she drifted off only to come back when police arrived who were able to lift her from the lough?

Mr. Weir repeatedly asked why McKinney failed to see his wife in the water, while police clearly could, albeit using a hand-held torch.

Mr. Weir also went on to claim that according to the calls, there were clear discrepancies in what McKinney said and then went on to say to others, including police, neighbours and friends, of how his wife came to be in the water.

They ranged from her falling from the jetty, to seeing her fall from the boat sideways, to seeing her trip and fall from the back of the cruiser, to not seeing her, only hearing a splash and a call for help, but no first scream.

Counsel further claimed McKinney even suggested the weather that night was very windy and the boat was rocking, which the lawyer said was almost the complete opposite to all of the other evidence.

Other alleged differences had McKinney being woken by his wife getting up and going out, while in another she woke him complaining of the rocking boat.

At one stage, said counsel, McKinney said he told his wife to wait while he rolled himself a cigarette, while he already had a box of pre-rolled cigarettes. In another, counsel said he'd been putting on a pair of trousers when Lu Na left the cabin.

Mr. Weir said since McKinney was the only source witness as to what allegedly occurred, it was vital that explanations for any such differences be given, but as yet, none had been given.

The prosecutor also said that such differences could not be passed off as coming from a man, a loving husband, who'd just lost his wife.

Counsel said McKinney had not been consistent in the descriptions he gave of the events that fateful night, and that all his "utterances" needed to be examined very, very carefully.

However, Mr. Weir said that while inconsistency may not indicate untruthfulness, it was a good starting point, and that it may also be an indicator of someone having difficulty with keeping their "story straight".

Today, Friday, July 16 will be the turn of Martin O'Rourke QC to begin making his final submissions on behalf of the defence.

The trial continues.