Detective tells court of 'unusual' actions by murder-accused Julia DeLuney
Photo:
RNZ / Mark Papalii
A detective who was among first responders to 79-year-old Helen Gregory's death has told the court he thought it was strange that her daughter, Julia DeLuney, chose to drive back to Kāpiti and get her husband instead of calling an ambulance.
The trial before a judge and jury at the High Court in Wellington is set down for four to five weeks, and on Wednesday entered its third day.
The Crown's case is that DeLuney violently attacked her mother on the evening of 24 January last year, possibly using a vase that was missing off one of the bedside tables, and staged it as a fall from the attic.
DeLuney dealt in crypto currency and appeared to be in some financial trouble.
However, the defence has asked the jury not to discount the possibility that there was a third person involved, with a neighbour reporting a mysterious knock on their door that same evening.
The detective, Luke Hensley, under cross examination by defence lawyer Quentin Duff, said when he was called in the death wasn't being treated as suspicious.
But he said the blood around the house struck him as strange - as did the claim from DeLuney that, when she had left her mother on the floor of a bedroom to drive back to Kāpiti to pick up her husband to help, there had been no significant blood.
Hensley had eight years' experience at the time, but called a more senior officer to get advice, and they walked through the house on Facetime.
In his statement on the night, he wrote they agreed it was "likely some sort of accident, but where the blood was located around the house was strange".
They locked the scene down for an examination the next day.
Hensley also noted at the time he thought it was "unusual" that DeLuney had driven to Kāpiti to fetch her husband, instead of calling an ambulance.
The defence's case is that while she was gone, a third person caused those fatal injuries to her mother.
Duff asked Hensley on the witness stand: "Did it ever occur to you that perhaps someone else might have broken into the house and caused those injuries and spread that blood?"
Hensley replied: "At the time I believed that getting the statement from Ms DeLuney would cover off a lot of that" and "fill in those blanks".
On the night of the death, DeLuney was not yet being treated as a suspect.
She and her husband followed police officers in their own car to the Johnsonville police station in the early hours of the morning to give statements.
The court heard DeLuney's account for the first time on Wednesday, in the form of her statement given in the early hours of that night in January 2024.
Detective Elizabeth Lee, who worked in the Wellington Crime Squad based in Johnsonville, read out the written statement to the court.
She was one of the officers who was on the scene, but then took witness statements from the DeLuneys at the police station just after 2am.
The statement begins by detailing some recent falls her mother had had in the past two years, both times ending up in hospital. One fall resulted in a concussion and a skull fracture.
She said her mother often lost her balance, or felt that she might lose her balance around home.
That evening, Julia DeLuney's husband, Antonio DeLuney, had brought the car home from work, and she had driven it to her mother's house on Baroda Street around 6pm.
It was her mother's birthday in May, and she and her daughters had thought tickets to the ballet would be a nice present.
They sat down at computer and picked out seats.
"She was in a good mood," she said in her statement.
But her mother was "kind of obsessed" with a shirt she had misplaced and asked for help finding it, going into cupboards and wardrobes.
At one point, DeLuney went up into the attic to store some watches.
The rungs of the ladder to the attic were built into the wall.
"Even I struggle to get up there," DeLuney said.
About 8.30pm, Gregory went into a cupboard to search for the shirt again, and knocked over some toilet paper, which she said she wanted to put into the attic.
DeLuney said at this point, she was in the kitchen.
"All of a sudden, I heard a big crash, and I went over to find that she had fallen."
Her mother was "sore everywhere" and holding the top of her head, "crumpled and tangled" against some objects at the base of the attic entrance.
She moved her to one of the bedrooms, with her mum saying things like, "I'll be alright".
She had a little bit of blood on her hand from holding her head. DeLuney said she couldn't see any open wounds, but it looked like the blood - "not a lot" - was coming from the top of her head.
She told her mother she was going to get her husband Antonio to help.
"At this stage I didn't think there was anything major going on, and I knew she hated hospitals," she said.
She left Gregory lying on the floor, with her feet facing the window. She was "agitated" and trying to get up, but she told her to stay put.
Then, she drove 40 minutes home, and found Antonio in bed. She told him her mother had fallen and she needed him to come with her to check on her.
It took another 40 minutes to get back to the house, and when they entered, they ran into the bedroom and "freaked out" because "it looked like a warzone" with blood in lots of different places.
She said none of that blood was there when she left, "so I got a hell of a shock".
The trial continues, and is set down for four to five weeks.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

RNZ News
26 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Supreme Court finds wrong legal test used to lock up autistic man for nearly 20 years
Excerpts from letters Jay has written "to the judge" about wanting to be home with him Mum. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly The Supreme Court has found the wrong legal test has been used to lock up an autistic man for nearly 20 years, but he will not walk free just yet. It has ordered the Family Court to urgently re-examine whether the man, only known as Jay, should remain detained, according to a just-released decision issued a year after the Supreme Court heard his case. Four of the five Supreme Court Justices said the Family Court must relook at Jay's right to liberty, weighing the seriousness of his original offence, his rehabilitation prospects and current risk. The majority found he could have been moved into the community earlier, and a failure to do so had negatively affected him, but he cannot be released immediately without proper support. The Family Court must now decide Jay's future using the Supreme Court's new guidance. Human rights lawyer Tony Ellis, who represented Jay's mother, described the ruling as a "significant win" and a "major step forward for disability rights". Photos from Jay's childhood. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Jay, now in his 40s, has been detained in a secure facility under the Intellectual Disability Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation Act since 2006 after he broke four of his neighbours' windows in 2004. Has since been assessed by multiple experts as being too dangerous to release and his care order has been extended 11 times. Jay has spent the past five years almost entirely in seclusion at the Mason Clinic in Auckland. A Family Court judge last year described his current living situation "untenable" after he became so distressed by construction noise next door he stuffed paper into his ears , requiring doctors to remove it. The construction across the road from the Mason Clinic in Auckland that caused Jay to become distressed. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly The man's mother brought his case to the Supreme Court in August last year in a bid to get his compulsory care order quashed, claiming he is being arbitrarily detained and his human rights breached. Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann and Justices Ellen France, Joe Williams and Forrest Miller found the Family Court's approach to detaining Jay was incorrect, and concluded that a decision to detain someone under the Act but be consistent with Bill of Rights Act and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Justice Stephen Kós disagreed, ruling he would have dismissed the appeal as Jay's continued detention was justified in order to protect public safety under existing law. "This is a tragic case. But granting the relief sought - J's immediate release into the community - can only lead to further tragedy," he wrote in the 131-page decision that outlines each judge's conclusions. Justices France and Miller said the court must set a new proportionality test weighting liberty against safety. "Eventually the risk of harm will be outweighed where the initial offending is comparatively minor; the person has been a care recipient for an extended period; and/or where the prospects of progress in the immediate future are minimal." They said there was evidence there had been opportunities for Jay to be cared for in the community at an earlier point in time and that failure to release him from care has adversely affected him and contributed to the complexity of his current position. However, they concluded it wasn't for the Supreme Court to direct Jay to be released immediately, and further care orders may be required to allow the necessary steps to be taken before he could be released into the community. Chief Justice Winkelmann said the nature and seriousness of Jay's original offending ought to be a significant factor when assessing whether to detain him, saying previous tests applied by lower courts were discriminatory. Justice Williams favoured a care-centred test focusing on dignity and quality of life and while he agreed the Family Court should look at Jay's case again with fresh consideration, it was not guaranteed he would be released. Jay's mother is "pleased" with the outcome but is still digesting the decision and its implications for her son. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Lawyer Tony Ellis says the ruling is "very much a win". "It's a significant win emphasising the rights of the disabled. "This is a complex judgment that's difficult even for lawyers to understand but it essentially says the Court of Appeal got it wrong and the Family Court has to urgently have a fresh look at Jay's case. "After eight years of trying to get him released, in my view, he's now going to have to be released because four out of five judges take the view that his continued detention would be unlawful. "Previously, the decision was you could lock somebody up for repeated periods. That was the law and now it's no longer the law, that was the wrong approach. "So anyone locked up on extended compulsory care orders will be entitled to have their decision revisited as a result of this case. That's a major step forward and a really important decision under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities." Jay's mother was "pleased" with the outcome but still digesting the decision and its implications for her son, he said.

RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Midday Report Essentials for Friday 15th August 2025
food transport 6 minutes ago In today's episode, the Supreme Court has found riverbeds can be included in Maori customary marine title - if other legal tests are meet; Neighbours have detailed the moments following the police shooting a couple in Christchurch on Wednesday night; KiwiRail and the government have confirmed how much it has cost to breaking the contract with South Korean shipbuilders of the scrapped iRex Ferries; The knives were out in Auckland on Thursday night as the country's finest butchers showed off their skills at the National Butchery Awards.

RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Neighbours detail moments after police shooting in Christchurch
crime police 20 minutes ago Neighbours have detailed the moments following the police shooting a couple in Christchurch on Wednesday night. Reporter Adam Burns spoke to Tuwhenuaroa Natanahira.