'Prominent inconsistencies' in murder accused Graeme Davidson's account of wife's death, court hears

Australia Broadcast Center

06-08-2025

A man accused of drowning his wife and staging it as a kayaking accident on a south-east Queensland dam almost five years ago allegedly had "prominent" and "obvious" inconsistencies in his version of events, a court has heard.
Earlier this year, Graeme Davidson was charged with the murder of Jacqueline Davidson, as well as two fraud offences in relation to claiming her life insurance.
Ms Davidson, 54, died after entering the water while she and Mr Davidson were paddling in separate kayaks on Lake Samsonvale in November 2020.
It is alleged Mr Davidson killed his wife then later fraudulently collected more than $200,000 in a life insurance payout, and tried to make a claim on a second policy worth $950,000.
The 56-year-old applied for bail in the Supreme Court last week, with a hearing continuing in Brisbane on Wednesday.
Finalising his submissions, Mr Davidson's lawyer Craig Eberhardt told the court it was "at best a weak circumstantial case" against his client.
"Simply because the evidence does not rule out the possibility at all that [Ms Davidson] died by accident," he said.
Mr Ebenhardt told the court the insurance claims were a "mutual fact" and did not point to suspicion against his client.
"That's the point of having insurance," he said.
Crown prosecutor Caroline Marco told the court that although the case was circumstantial and "still very much in its early stages in the proceedings", it was not accepted it was "tenuous".
"The fact that it's circumstantial doesn't render it inherently weak or that it can never be considered a strong case," she said.
The court previously heard Mr Davidson told police his wife had fallen into the water while she was trying to take a photo of him.
He told them she had become stressed when he stood up in his kayak and used their "safe word" so he would stop, the court previously heard.
Mr Davidson was not sure what happened next, but the court previously heard sometime later he realised his wife was in the water, which he described as murky with plants beneath the surface, and went in and pulled her out.
Ms Marco told the court Mr Davidson had provided various accounts to people about what happened, and there were "prominent inconsistencies" in the different versions.
This included that Ms Davidson was still conscious when he rescued her from the water, that he dove from his kayak into the water to retrieve her, and that her foot may have been caught in "reeds or something".
The court heard the prosecution would also argue there were inconsistencies with Mr Davidson's phone use, including that it allegedly "ceased to exist" on the network after just over 45 minutes into their kayak trip.
Ms Marco told the court this was "not consistent with the timeline presented" to police, as he said they were using it.
"They were on the water for about three hours … he gave [Ms Davidson] his phone to take photographs," she said.
However, it was accepted the phone may have been on flight mode at the time and further telecommunications evidence was outstanding.
The court heard there were different version of events provided about the whereabouts of his device after his wife entered the water.
Ms Marco told the court Mr Davidson said to police on the day that his phone would have been on his wife's kayak, but months later he told a different officer that he looked for it but could not find it and it must have fallen into the water.
"The allegation is [the phone] was disposed of," she said.
"There has to be a reason why it was not used to render assistance to [Ms Davidson]."
It was previously submitted to the court that differing details could be attributed to Mr Davidson going through a traumatic event, or that other statements made by witnesses may not have been accurate.
Ms Marco also pointed to the medical evidence in the case, which she called "neutral", despite Mr Eberhardt previously submitting it did not indicate foul play.
"The lack of injuries doesn't prove that something did or didn't happen," she said.
The court previously heard Mr Davidson had an affair in 2019, and Ms Davidson had confided in a friend about wanting to separate from him.
In a statement from that friend, it's alleged Ms Davidson said getting a divorce was "not well received" by her husband, and he did not want to end their marriage due to the financial impact it would have on him.
If you need help immediately call emergency services on triple-0
Ms Marco told the court there were further messages to friends the following year, and Ms Davidson had said she believed her husband was looking through her phone.
"In my submission, that is evidence the marriage was in trouble," she said.
The court previously heard that three years before his wife's death, Mr Davidson allegedly quipped to a friend during a discussion about another friend's separation that he would "kill her and move to Thailand" if she left him and took his pension.
Ms Marco told the court this was "of course what is alleged that he did".
"[Mr Eberhardt] described this as a quip but … that gloss is not supported by [the witness's] evidence," she said.
"[The witness] said, it was said with a venom that shocked him".
The court heard Mr Davidson texted a different friend in 2023 and told him he was "a cliché" as he was an older man who married a younger woman in Thailand.
"There are lots of western divorcees out here because there are no de facto laws and you can't lose 50 per cent of your shit," he said in the text message.
Ms Marco told the court this was evidence Mr Davidson had concerns about dividing assets.
Mr Ebenhardt told the court the fact his client moved to Thailand after his wife's death was "irrelevant".
"He went there initially just to see if he liked it rather than move," he said.
"He didn't marry his [current] wife until 2022."
The bail decision will be handed down on Friday.