More than 17 years after Cindy Crossthwaithe was found bashed, strangled and shot in the head of her Melbourne home, her estranged husband Emil Petrov has been found guilty of the brutal murder.
The 41-year-old mother-of-three was discovered dead and partially covered by a pink blanket by her father Phillip after the alarm was raised when she failed to pick her children up from school on June 20, 2007.
Her youngest, a 13-month-old boy, was found unharmed lying on the bed in Ms Crossthwaite’s Melton South home.
Petrov, also known as Bill, has been standing trial in Victoria’s Supreme Court where, on Wednesday, a jury of 12 unanimously delivered a verdict of guilty after a week of deliberations.
Members of Ms Crossthwaite’s family attended court for the verdict as well as a supporter of Petrov.
“Guilty,” the forewoman said when asked what the verdict was.
Phillip Crossthwaite was seen pumping his fist in the air as the verdict came back as Petrov shifted in his seat and shook his head.
Petrov had denied he was responsible for his wife’s death. Picture: NewsWire/ David Crosling
Prosecutors, led by Crown prosecutor Mark Gibson KC, argued Petrov held a deep-seated hatred for his estranged wife after their split and had sought revenge through a “well-planned, well-implemented execution”.
“From the evidence, we know that Bill Petrov stood to gain a lot by killing Cindy Crossthwaite. He stood to achieve vengeance for what he believed she had done to him and he stood to gain the opportunity to avoid assets being stripped from him,” he said.
“The thing that stands out with this killing, we submit, is that it bears all the hallmarks of a very personal crime; a crime of vengeance, we would say.”
Petrov, prosecutors argued, had broken into Ms Crossthwaite’s home and killed her about 9.10am after she returned from dropping their two children at the local school.
Ms Crossthwaite was a mother-of-three. Picture: Supplied.
Her death remains unsolved for close to two decades. Picture: Supplied.
But they also submitted if the jury could not reach the conclusion it was Petrov beyond reasonable doubt, they could alternatively find him guilty on the basis he entered into an agreement with an unknown person to murder her.
The jury was told he had taken the week off work and two nearby residents had reported seeing a man acting suspiciously on June 19 and 20.
Petrov’s defence, led by Ashley Halphen, put forward a range of other possible explanations, including a random robbery gone wrong and the possibility his father, Ljubisa Petrov orchestrated the murder without his son’s knowledge.
Mr Halphen said Ljubisa blamed Ms Crossthwaite for the couple’s split, believing she had been unfaithful and had engineered allegations of sexual misconduct against him that resulted in a police investigation.
Petrov was living with his parents after the spilt. Picture: Supplied.
The jury was told Petrov Sr. has since died and police did not lay any charges.
“You might think this is entirely reasonable and realistic,” Mr Halphen said.
Key to the prosecution case was a former friend of Petrov, Brian O’Shea, who until April had also been accused of Ms Crossthwaithe’s murder before agreeing to give evidence.
Mr O’Shea told the jury he had sourced a firearm for Petrov about a year earlier and he had been “like a broken record” in complaining about Ms Crossthwaite. Just six to eight weeks before her death, Mr O’Shea claimed Petrov had shown him a wig, gloves and dark clothing in the boot of his car.
“I’m going to kill Cindy, will you help me? I’m going to kill the c–t,” he said.
He will be sentenced at a later date. Picture: NewsWire / Luis Enrique Ascui
Mr Halphen attacked Mr O’Shea’s evidence, suggesting that the dropping of his murder charge had given him a huge motive to lie.
“After almost 17 years, after years of radio silence … he gave a version of various events that fitted into the prosecution case like a glove,” he said.
Mr Halphen argued there were significant gaps in the prosecution case, including the lack of any forensic evidence, saying; “intense feelings associated with a messy separation is not enough to establish murder.”