UK Man Found Guilty Over Death of Australian Farmstay Host Who Rejected His Advances Following a Previous ‘Sexual Daliance’

A U.K. man has been convicted on manslaughter charges over the death of his farmstay host in central Victoria after she rejected his advances.

Timothy Loosemore’s conviction followed a 14-day trial in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The 62-year-old was found not guilty on murder charges but guilty of manslaughter by a jury on Friday.

The remains of the victim, 60-year-old Maree Vermont, were found after a house fire in Goldie, near Kilmore, in August 2023. Her cause of death could not be determined by a pathologist as her body had been severely charred in the blaze, the court heard.

Loosemore was a Regular Guest of Vermont’s, The Pair Previously Had a ‘Brief Sexual Daliance’

Loosemore had been an on-and-off farmstay guest at Vermont’s home, which was located 90 minutes north of Melbourne. According to Crown prosecutor Mark Gibson, KC, Loosemore “snapped” because he wanted to pursue an intimate relationship with Vermont after they had a “brief sexual dalliance” previously but his advances were repeatedly rejected.

Gibson said Loosemore fatally attacked Vermont on the eve of Aug. 5, and even sustained scratches on his face and neck as she fought back. Investigators also found her blood on his clothes. After the fatal attack, Loosemore set the house on fire to cover up his crime.

Vermont Wasn’t Breathing When the Fire Started, Had Asked Her Son to Keep an Eye on Loosemore Days Before Her Death

Gibson also pointed out that there was a “lack of sooting” in Vermont’s airways, which indicated she was not breathing when the fire started.

The court heard that Vermont sent her son a text message in the days before her death asking him to keep an eye on Loosemore while he was staying with them. “I made it clear that I don’t want an intimate relationship with him. He is taking it badly,” Vermont said in the text message.

Gibson told the court three plastic fuel containers were missing from the property, according to Vermont’s son, and while no accelerant was detected, it could have evaporated in the fire, according to the evidence of an arson chemist.

Gibson also drew attention to the fact that there were three kitchen knives found on the floor of the living room, but no forensic material could be recovered due to the fire.

Loosemore’s Defence Claimed There Wasn’t Enough Evidence to Prove the Murder, Pair was in an ‘Uncertain’ Relationship

Defence barrister Christopher Farrington told the court Loosemore denied assaulting or killing Vermont, or setting the house on fire. In his closing arguments, he said the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Loosemore was guilty of murder.

Farrington said the evidence from Vermont’s friends and family suggested an “uncertain” relationship that may have meant more to one than the other. “That’s a long way from this simple narrative of rejection, upon which the prosecution relies,” he said. He added the pair had even travelled to hot springs together for Loosemore’s birthday about a week before her death.

Farrington said the evidence of the arson chemist was also not convincing. “The origin of the fire narrowed only to the lounge, no precise point of ignition, no ignition source, no confirmed accelerant, negative testing for flammable liquid,” Mr Farrington told the court, adding that the missing fuel containers could have been moved by the firefighters attending to the emergency.

Farrington Said Scratches on Loosemore’s Face Could Have Been Caused by Himself

Farrinton further argued that Loosemore could have been scratched on his face by barbed wire or a rosebush on his way to raise the alarm at a neighbour’s house.

“You’ve got a drunk man with a blood alcohol reading of 0.18, stumbling through the darkness with what I suggest is mud on his knees,” he told the court.

He told the court Loosemore’s explanation to witnesses and emergency responders that he had left the house to get more firewood and returned to find it ablaze was “largely consistent.” And his actions after the fire were those of a person “who genuinely does not know what has taken place.”

“Mr Loosemore goes to [a neighbour’s house] and raises the alarm. Not after cleaning himself. Not after changing clothes. Not after concealing the very evidence that the Crown says points to his guilt,” Mr Farrington said.

Loosemore will return to court for a plea hearing in September.