04 The Airbnb Guest | How this trial challenged two juries

Two juries struggled to reach a verdict for Timothy Loosemore, the last eventually settling on manslaughter. In this episode we look at what might have stopped them from convicting him of murder. In the final part of The Case of The Airbnb Guest, Anna McGuinness and Stocky discuss the questions that may have been left in the jury's mind and we hear what Maree Vermont's children thought of the verdict. Anna's latest reporting of the case can be found here: Maree Vermont's sons speak of devastation after Airbnb guest found guilty of killing her https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-06-30/maree-vermont-family-react-to-timothy-loosemore-verdict/106840318 If you have any questions you'd like Anna and Stocky to answer in future episodes, please email [email protected] mailto:[email protected]. The Case Of is the follow-up to the hit podcast Mushroom Case Daily, and all episodes of that show will remain available in the back catalogue of The Case Of.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  Jack McLennam was 27, fit and visibly strong.

• 0:04Speaker 01

  He was trained well. He knew how to hit and I was gobsmacked.

• 0:08Speaker 00

  He seemed ready for anything, but then he suddenly vanished.

• 0:12Speaker 02

  I was just talking to him last night, like, how the hell does that happen?

• 0:16Speaker 00

  I'm Rob Bergen. Join me as I investigate what became of Jack in the new season of Unravel.

• 0:22Speaker 03

  There has to be something more nefarious going on.

• 0:24Speaker 00

  Search for the Unravel podcast on ABC Listen or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 0:29Speaker 04

  ABC Listen. Podcasts, radio, news, music and more.

• 0:46Speaker 00

  A jury decided that Airbnb guest Timothy Loosemore killed his host, Marie Vermont, but they settled on a conviction for manslaughter instead of murder. In this episode, we'll tell you why we think both juries who considered this case struggled to get all the way to murder. I'm Stephen Stockwell. This is episode four of the case of the Airbnb guest.

• 1:06Speaker 05

  Mr. Loosemore was a farm state guest at the home in Goldie near Kilmore.

• 1:10Speaker 06

  We didn't really expect to have something dangerous happen.

• 1:14Speaker 05

  The prosecution alleges the 62-year-old from the UK killed Miss Vermont and lit a house fire to cover it up.

• 1:20Speaker 06

  She was a very kind and caring person and we're very proud of who she was, how she brought us up. This hand-built house was a labour of love.

• 1:29Speaker 00

  It's all been lost alongside everything she owned and, her son say, evidence of her final moments.

• 1:39Speaker 00

  Throughout the trial of Timothy Loosemore, we heard two different versions of his relationship with Marie Vermont. A welcome help or a frustrated ex-lover who snapped. Ultimately, the jury decided that he killed her, but he was not guilty of murder. Instead, found guilty of manslaughter. And in this episode, myself and Anna McGuinness, an ABC reporter in Bendigo, will be unpacking that verdict and talking about some of the things that stood out to us. Welcome, Anna.

• 2:05Speaker 05

  Hi, Stocky.

• 2:06Speaker 00

  Before we get going any further than this, the question we always start with in these episodes was, were you surprised by the verdict?

• 2:14Speaker 05

  So initially I was, I actually thought maybe the defence had put enough doubt, well, they'd put enough doubt into my mind that I was sort of leaning towards not guilty. But then going back through the evidence for the podcast and looking at kind of the big picture, I couldn't really see it any other way.

• 2:32Speaker 00

  Yeah, right, okay. Um, I wasn't really, I mean, I was probably more leaning leaning the other way than you, Anna. Um, but I was thinking that murder is a pretty high bar for a jury to reach. Um, and while the prosecution prosecution did paint a picture of a very strained relationship between Timothy Lewis Moore and Marie Vermont through her friends and through her children, it didn't feel like that was completely sealed. I feel like there was so little evidence after the fire that it seemed like there were gaps in what might have happened that night. And I've kind of actually been wondering if the deciding factor was whether the jury couldn't be sure that Timothy Lewis Moore intended to kill to kill Marie Vermont. That's one of the four elements of murder is that intent.

• 3:13Speaker 00

  I mean, when you're reflecting on the verdict they landed on, is is that's when you found yourself thinking about that? That kind of intention when it comes to that that element?

• 3:22Speaker 05

  Yeah, that kind of seems like the obvious point where the jury might have faltered on the kind of checklist for the elements of murder. You've got the same two at the start for manslaughter, which is that they carried out the acts that caused Marie's death and that they were carried out consciously, voluntarily and deliberately. And then this is where it changes is murder. The next one is the intention to kill or cause really serious injury. Whereas for manslaughter, it just goes to the acts were unlawful. So that's where kind of the intention comes out of it for the manslaughter charge.

• 3:54Speaker 00

  Hmm.

• 3:54Speaker 05

  And I think for me, um, the difficulty maybe the jury had for the intention might have also come from the fact that there was no cause of death and so little could be taken, um, so little evidence could be taken from Marie's body after the fire.

• 4:10Speaker 00

  Yeah, totally. Interesting as well, talking about whether or not someone's conscious of their actions. I mean, we know that Timothy Lewis Moore had been drinking. He'd also had some painkillers and some antibiotics after having some dental work done. But, you know, we heard the prosecutor say that doesn't mean that he's not conscious in his actions. You can drink and it could lower your inhibitions, but, you know, you're still aware of what you're doing. Obviously, Anna, we don't know the thinking of the jury. This is a really difficult decision. And we know that because, you know, it took the jury in this trial about a week. But the first trial, which was last year, it took a jury five weeks, sitting there, kind of deliberating on, you know, whether or not Timothy Lewis Moore was guilty of the murder or manslaughter of Marie Vermont. And they just couldn't get there in the end. I mean, is that interesting to you that it's something that's taken them so long? It's such a hard path to get to this point?

• 4:56Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think the interesting thing for me is that the jury in this trial was played pre-recorded evidence from the last trial. So a lot of the witnesses didn't actually have to get up on the stand and give their evidence again. So it's interesting to me that both the juries kind of saw the same thing. And how they came to these different conclusions, we'll never really know.

• 5:19Speaker 00

  Yeah, it's interesting that they've kind of relied almost on the same evidence in those trials. And we do know, you know, while the evidence was the same, and the witnesses were the same, different prosecution, different defence team in this trial as well.

• 5:31Speaker 05

  I guess it also goes to the fact that, you know, juries are made up of 12 individuals and people see things different ways. So, you know, you don't know what you're going to end up with and the people that are in that room and what their perspectives are.

• 5:46Speaker 00

  A hundred percent. Yeah, that's exactly right. Yeah, you never know where people are coming from or what they're thinking and how they're interpreting the evidence. Because the purpose of the jury system is you have the people from the community, your peers, assessing the evidence that's presented to you. And, you know, people have different opinions and different backgrounds and different things they bring to juries as well. Anna, at the centre of this trial is obviously Marie Vermont, who died in the altercation or whatever's happened in the stone house with Timothy Lewis Moore that night. Timothy Lewis Moore guilty of Marie Vermont's manslaughter. Yeah, we talked a lot about her sons throughout this podcast. She has three sons and, you know, you've actually spoken to them since the trial. How have they been dealing with all of this?

• 6:27Speaker 05

  So two of the sons, Darcy and Lachlan, gave evidence during the trial. The third, Harrison, was able to sit through and watch all of it. I spoke to Darcy and Harrison a few days after the verdict and obviously they'd been through a lot. This was the second trial. It's been three years since the incident and they were obviously still coming to terms with the verdict.

• 6:50Speaker 00

  What did they think of the verdict?

• 6:52Speaker 05

  So the sense I got from them was it was quite upsetting to have that confirmation from a jury that their mother had been killed by Timothy Loosemore. I asked them about what this verdict means for them and their mother and this is some of what Darcy and Harrison had to say.

• 7:09Speaker 06

  It was upsetting and distressing to hear the verdict, given the fact that the jury did come to the conclusion that he killed her. But given the fact that a lot of evidence was lost, there was no way to prove beyond reasonable doubt in their mind of any other outcome, so we have to accept what we can get. Now, it's important to, it's important to convey that in this manslaughter case, it was found that Tim had violently assaulted Marie, my mum, and that he had killed her as well. There's no question about that.

• 7:54Speaker 06

  So it's not an accident and the court didn't deem it as an accident in this manslaughter case. But with the house being burnt down, that's as far as the case could go.

• 8:06Speaker 05

  So that's Darcy and Harrison, two of Marie Vermont's three sons, speaking at the Stone House just a few days after the verdict.

• 8:12Speaker 00

  Anna, it sounds as though they're being pretty careful when they're talking through their reactions to that verdict. I mean, do they need to kind of catch their language in any way? I mean, sentencing's still to come. Timothy Loosemore could still appeal. Like, you know, are there things they're trying not to overstep in these conversations?

• 8:30Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think in any case like this where the trial is over, so there's no jury to prejudice, but they're still obviously wanting the best outcome in terms of justice for their mother. And we've still got a bit to play out in this case, as you said, with the plea hearing coming up and then the ultimate sentencing beyond that.

• 8:47Speaker 00

  Hmm, yeah, we'll put a link to your story in the episode description for this episode. So everyone can read a little bit more about the conversation you had with Marie Vermont's sons. And, you know, when we're talking about this trial and the verdict that we've got, I mean, what have you been thinking about as it's all wrapped up and as it's all finished? What have you found yourself reflecting on?

• 9:09Speaker 05

  I think it's about some of the holes that were left from the fire, the evidence that we didn't have because it was lost in the house fire. For example, Timothy Luce Moore's phone was never recovered. He tells police that he left it inside the house. Marie Vermont's phone also not recovered. And I wonder whether discussions between them, text messages, might have helped paint some of the picture of the relationship between them, particularly when he goes to Cairns and then ultimately comes back. We heard from Darcy that Marie thought there was an agreement that there would be no romantic relationship. So whether there was any messages about that that could have shown for certain what

• 9:52Speaker 05

  the arrangement was when Timothy Luce Moore returned to the Stone House.

• 9:56Speaker 00

  Yeah, I've been thinking about that relationship a lot as well and how much we don't know about it. And, I mean, we did hear a lot from Marie Vermont's friends, we heard a lot from Darcy, we heard from her mum about what that relationship looked like and kind of what conversations she'd been having with Timothy Luce Moore. But every time there was kind of a deadline put on him, leaving a different person seemed to have a different version of when that was. So it did seem to be quite malleable. And I think, yeah, having the phones of Timothy Luce Moore and Marie Vermont would help us understand that in a much greater detail as well.

• 10:29Speaker 00

  Also, the thing I've found myself thinking about as well is just that fire, as you mentioned, you know, so much was destroyed in that fire. Marie's body as well, you know, we heard that there was very little evidence that could be recovered from it. They couldn't find any DNA from under her fingernails. There was no way of telling if she'd sustained any injuries to her upper body as well. You know, is that something as well that you've thought about, like how little we know about what happened to her?

• 10:54Speaker 05

  Absolutely, and also the fire seemed to make it really difficult for the experts to say anything with real certainty.

• 11:02Speaker 00

  Hmm.

• 11:03Speaker 05

  Um, for example, the cause of death, but there was also the fire investigator who said maybe there was petrol used, but there wasn't enough for him to really confirm it. So maybe if I was on the jury, that would throw enough doubt on things that we don't have a cause of death, we can't say for certain if petrol was used in the fire.

• 11:21Speaker 00

  Hmm, yeah, and I think the fire for me is a, is a really big part of it as well. Um, you know, hearing evidence from the fire investigator that for a fire to burn in the way that that has burnt, it is either, there's either an accelerant that's been used or it's, there's an ignition point in several places around that kind of room. And we know that, you know, it's a house built of stone, there is, you know, a lot of wood in it. We talked about the, the wooden beams that are across the, the roof of that place and also the wooden staircase and, and all of those things. But it's also got a concrete floor. So, you know, for me, I really struggled to understand how a fire starts in the way that Timothy Lewis Moore describes it starting, where he walks outside the house for a very short period of time, turns around and it's just kind of all of a sudden ablaze,

• 12:04Speaker 00

  when, you know, realistically to have the situation that we've talked about here, you know, there's an accelerant that's been used, so someone's put petrol around the place or something's caught fire in there, or that there's been a number of different ignition points. And to me, none of that seemed to add up.

• 12:19Speaker 05

  Absolutely. And maybe if there was an alternative version put forward to really kind of given another explanation for how this could have happened, but the way that it was described, that he kind of just turned around and saw a house fully ablaze and couldn't get back inside because it was so hot, whether that was enough for the jury to, to say, well, that doesn't really seem plausible.

• 12:41Speaker 00

  Yeah. And again, that fire burning so hot that it destroys so much evidence, something we spoke about a bit through this trial with the knives that were found, found next to Marie Vermont's body, three knives found next to her body in the living room floor. And to me, that just seems. So strange that they would be next to her body, you know, it wasn't like these were cheese knives or anything like that, this was described as kitchen knives. And so for them to be next to her body, you know, there was no evidence that could be recovered from them uh as well. That just really stuck out to me as kind of an unfinished loop, an unclosed loop, you know, neither the defence or the prosecution, as we spoke about in our last episode, kind of came back to them at any point because there's no evidence that they could draw from them. But are they something you've thought about?

• 13:24Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think it feel, they kind of feel like they could have been a major piece of evidence in a murder trial, three kitchen knives. I saw the photos, the blades were about 20 centimetres long, so as you say, not a butter knife. But because there was no evidence, forensic material to be taken from them, they were just sort of mentioned by the prosecution, all they could say was that they were there.

• 13:45Speaker 00

  Hmm.

• 13:46Speaker 05

  And so the defence is able to say then, well, anything beyond that is just speculation because you have no evidence to take from them.

• 13:54Speaker 00

  Yeah, um and you talked before just a little bit about the kind of, you know, no alternative explanation from Timothy Loosemore around, you know, what has happened during that fire. I mean, what do you make of the the defence's, you know, point in their closing where they highlighted Timothy Loosemore's actions after the fire started, you know, he's moving cars, he's doing these things, you know, why would you move the car of a of a woman who you've just murdered? What's the point of that? Did you make much of any of that?

• 14:22Speaker 05

  Yeah, I was a bit confused by the the way this was sort of used to wrap up the defence closing. They're saying it's the actions of someone responding to an unfolding emergency. But for me, if I was on the jury, I'd be wondering why, why isn't he finding a hose to try and put out this fire? Why isn't he running straight to the neighbour's house to raise the alarm if he can't find a phone? If he knows that Marie is inside the house, then what's, why is he bothering to move cars and save cars from this fire?

• 14:53Speaker 00

  Um. Yeah. Um. One of the things the prosecution sort of laid out at the start, and this is kind of common in a um, in a trial like this, is that they point to the evidence as pieces of a jigsaw. You know, they're kind of creating this um picture from different pieces of evidence. Uh, they'll, you know, they'll say there might be a missing piece here and there, but you can still see the full picture. The defence, in the end, was kind of using that same metaphor and turned it back, saying, look, you know, there's just too many missing pieces in this. There's not enough uh in the jigsaw for you to really understand what's going on. I mean, Anna, were there just too many missing pieces?

• 15:26Speaker 05

  Yeah, I think the defence even said that the pieces that we have aren't even whole pieces. The pieces themselves are sort of half pieces. So how can you even come to any sort of conclusion from it? And I think what we could see at the end was a woman was found dead after a house fire. The only other person living there at the time was smelling of petrol. There was petrol on his clothes and really unable to explain what happened.

• 15:52Speaker 00

  Um. Yeah. Um. I think there was a point as well from the defence closing as well, which where they say, they say, you know, at the height of the evidence on the house fire, all we know is that there was a fire. Uh, you know, there's no evidence to point to accelerant being used, how it started, any of that. Like, at the height of the evidence, all you know is that there was a fire, and that's what they have to take away from it as well. So there was a lot that the the jury didn't have uh in this trial when they were trying to make a decision about this as well. Um. And we've had a lot of questions being sent to the case of at abc.net.au, the case of Mailbag. I'd love to dive into some of them with you. The first one is a question from Anna. It's not you, I've checked. Um. And this question was, why did Timothy Luce Moore come to Australia?

• 16:36Speaker 05

  So what we know about Timothy Luce Moore's trip to Australia was he had come here with his son. They'd cycled from Perth to Victoria over roughly three to four months. He'd actually lived in WA in the eighties for a couple of years, so, you know, he wasn't completely an unknown to Australia. And we know that he was a keen cyclist because of character references we heard from a cycling club where uh he was part of back in the UK.

• 17:02Speaker 00

  Thank you, Anna, uh and thank you, other Anna, for sending in that question to the case of at abc.net.au. Uh, Jane has also emailed. Um. She's asked whether or not Timothy Luce Moore had any history of domestic or family violence.

• 17:15Speaker 05

  We heard from the police informant at the end of the trial, who said that the police made inquiries about any sort of past criminal history. And they gave evidence that Timothy Luce Moore didn't have any prior convictions or any other pending matters.

• 17:29Speaker 00

  Yeah, that really surprised me. I was actually wasn't expecting to get that kind of level of detail of his background. Because, I mean, in a trial like this, you're not able to include any previous convictions or charges. Because that may make a jury think that someone's guilty, but glad we could answer it anyway. If you have any questions you'd like answered in future case of episodes, get in touch, [email protected]. We are going through all of them, reading all of them and appreciate all of your thoughts, feedback and questions that get sent into that mailbag. Anna, where do we go from here?

• 18:03Speaker 05

  So next steps is the pre-sentence hearing, that'll be in September, on the 3rd of September. The defence and prosecution will both be putting forward their reasons for sentencing, what they think is the justice that he deserves. In this case for manslaughter, the maximum sentence is 25 years' jail.

• 18:25Speaker 00

  Yeah, it'd be interesting to see, Anna, how the judge assesses the egregiousness of this act, of Timothy Luce Moore's murder of Marie Vermont in this case, when he's getting to the sentencing. I mean, in the trial of Aaron Patterson, we had Justice Beale talking through in the sentencing what facts he kind of believed from the case, what version he had taken from the evidence presented to him. And while the jury are the people who are assessing whether or not he's guilty of this act, the judge is the one who'll be sentencing him and will be considering, as I mentioned, the egregiousness of what he's done. And, you know, when you think about what has happened here, Timothy Luce Moore has killed the mother of three children, you know, in the house that she has built, you know, by hand, basically over the course of 30 years.

• 19:08Speaker 00

  It is a really horrific act, you know, not only has that happened, but, you know, her house is burnt down following this and her body's been almost completely destroyed in that process as well. So, yeah, it's a really horrific act that Timothy Luce Moore has committed here. And, you know, it's going to have a very strong impact on the people around Marie Vermont for a very long time. Anna, what are you thinking about when, you know, that stage is coming? And, you know, what will be considered as the judge is handing down his sentence?

• 19:40Speaker 05

  Yeah, I thought maybe we got a hint from the prosecution opening when they talked about the perverse nature of the crime.

• 19:48Speaker 00

  Hmm.

• 19:48Speaker 05

  That Marie was giving Timothy Loosemore a place to stay, food in exchange for work, and that maybe that added to the element of, you know, the moral wrongdoing in the crime as well.

• 20:01Speaker 00

  Hmm. It's really interesting hearing about Marie Vermont throughout this trial. You know, she really does strike me throughout, you know, hearing everything I've heard. Someone who would offer that to someone who comes to her house and stays. You know, we heard so many lovely vignettes of her from the Rolling Solo Camping Group and all of that. And you spent time with her sons as well. How did they want Marie to be remembered?

• 20:26Speaker 05

  Yeah, they described Marie as a really loving, kind, generous mum. It was really clear from speaking to them, the warmth of their childhood and their relationship with their mum. I asked them about how she was sort of going in the recent time before the fire. And they talked about how happy she was being independent and learning to love living life on her own. Here's some of Darcy and Harrison reflecting on what she was like.

• 20:54Speaker 06

  She looked after a lot of people, just as a really vibrant community member. She really enriched the community. She was highly social and just caring and fun. But she was also very switched on. She would be somebody who could talk to people from the community and support them, or she'd trade a lot of farm produce with neighbours, really caring member of the community.

• 21:21Speaker 03

  Yeah, she was a very kind and caring person.

• 21:26Speaker 03

  And we're very proud of who she was, how she brought us up, taught us to be.

• 21:37Speaker 00

  Loving and caring people and try to share that with the world and give generosity onward. We're proud of her and she's proud of us.

• 21:49Speaker 00

  That's Darcy and Harrison Vermont speaking to Anna at the Stone House. Anna, you did speak to them at the Stone House, the house that's been the kind of feature of this trial. It's where this manslaughter happened. It was a house that's been gutted by fire. What state is it in now?

• 22:09Speaker 05

  So Darcy and Harrison have taken ownership of the property and are living there now. The Stone House is really kind of still standing. You can see the huge stone walls. They sort of look untouched, but it's everything around it. The crumpled tin roof and inside the beams are totally blackened, charred or no longer there. And Marie's handcrafted windows are all gone, the doors are all gone. So the foundations are still standing, but it's a lot of, would be a ton of work to bring it back to its former glory. And it had been uninsured just a few months before the fire because they were between insurance companies.

• 22:50Speaker 05

  So it's still up in the air what its future will be. But for me it was sad to see, I guess, the legacy of work by the whole family and especially Marie just totally destroyed.

• 23:00Speaker 00

  Hmm. Is the plan for Darcy and Harrison to try and rebuild that?

• 23:04Speaker 05

  I think they would like to, but given what they're dealing with still, you know, it's only been three years, but two trials, there's still a lot to work through and decide what is feasible for them in the aftermath of all this.

• 23:18Speaker 00

  Yeah, yeah, it is a lot to be dealing with. Anna, thank you so much for joining us for this series. I really appreciate the look you've given us inside this trial. Your analysis and kind of explanation of the verdict has been fascinating. So thank you for being a part of the case of.

• 23:33Speaker 05

  Thanks for having me, Stocky.

• 23:34Speaker 00

  And thank you so much for listening to this series. If you haven't heard our verdict episode on Tuesday, go back and have a listen to that one. It's in your feeds now. Also, if you're looking for something else to wrap your ears around, What Became of Jack?, the most recent unravel series, has just wrapped up. And I caught up with Rob to talk through the behind the scenes of that story. So you can get that in ABC Listen now. Also, in other unravel news, there's an update in the Blood on the Track series. The coroner has finally delivered her findings into the death of Mark Haynes. This is the third inquest that's been done into his death. This all comes 40 years later, and you can catch up on ABC Listen for the latest details there. Also, next Tuesday, we might have an introduction to

• 24:17Speaker 00

  our next trial coverage. It's a big one that I think you'll be very interested in. But we do need to wait until Monday to find out what we are able to say. So you'll find out on Tuesday.

• 24:33Speaker 00

  The Case of the Airbnb Guest is produced by ABC Audio Studios and ABC News. This episode was reported by Anna McGuinness and presented by me, Stephen Stockwell. Our supervising producer is Greg Muller and our executive producer is Claire Rollinson. Thank you to senior lawyer Jasmine Sims, our legal queen, for her legal advice every single day, and to the Bendigo newsroom, and also to Audio Studios manager, Eric George. This episode was produced on the land of the Jar Jar Warung and Warundrie people.