GO AD FREE | Get your Digital Subscription for only 50p a week! Use code SUMMER
GET STARTEDMore on KentOnline
GO AD FREE | Get your Digital Subscription for only 50p a week! Use code SUMMER
GET STARTEDMore on KentOnline
Only one man knows the complete truth of what happened to Sarah Wellgreen on the night she disappeared — and a murder jury now know enough to be sure that man is Ben Lacomba, prosecutors claim.
Making her closing speech at Woolwich Crown Court today Alison Morgan said the trial had heard compelling evidence to show the 46-year-old mother-of-five, from Bazes Shaw, New Ash Green, was murdered on the night of October 9 and 10 2018 by Lacomba, 39, who had then disposed of her body.
“In October 2018 Sarah Wellgreen was a beautiful woman who had everything to live for,” she began.
“Sarah had five children who she loved deeply, she had parents who cared for her greatly, she had many friends, she had a new job with a great salary and a company car.
"She almost had a mortgage and was looking to buy the defendant out of the family home.”
Miss Morgan referred to evidence from Sarah’s friend on her mood before her disappearance, adding: “She was happy, she was fun, she was her usual smiley self, telling others ‘there’s always something to look forward to, you just need to open your eyes a bit more and dream.’
“She was murdered on the night of October 9-10 by this defendant - an angry and bitter, controlling man.
“He was not going to let Sarah kick him out, taking his children away from him and his mother so he started to plan.
"How long he planned for is known only to him - was it just days before, triggered by the reality of Sarah’s new job, which would allow her to be free and independent?
"Or was it months before, triggered by the realisation that Sarah was going to get a mortgage?
“Only he knows and only he knows where Sarah is now. Only he can unlock that secret - the secret that will tell us how he killed her, how he disposed of her body. He has chosen not to reveal that.”
Ms Morgan told the jury that all other explanations for Sarah’s disappearance - from being murdered by an unknown acquaintance to suicide - were implausible, and said Lacomba had deliberately floated the idea that Sarah had met someone on a dating app, who was in some way connected to her disappearance.
“The fanciful idea that that happened come from one place - the defendant’s imagination,” she added, noting Lacomba had made such suggestions from the moment he reported Sarah missing.
“Stripping away the defendant’s attempts to distract you, there’s only one option in this case,” she said, asking the jury to consider the evidence of the defendant’s actions, adding: “That tells you beyond any doubt that he is responsible for Sarah Wellgreen’s murder.”
She said he had told a succession of lies to evade the truth, adding: “This defendant has been trying to get out of the truth from the day he called police on October 11 right up to when he gave evidence before you.”
Foremost among the alleged lies, said Ms Morgan, was Lacomba’s assertion that he was in his bedroom asleep all night from October 9 to 10, whereas CCTV evidence suggested his car had been driven along roads leading away from New Ash Green, and that his phone was active before and after he’s alleged to have disposed of Sarah’s body.
And Ms Morgan noted Lacomba’s own CCTV cameras had been turned off, despite the fact they didn’t record on to a hard drive.
The court previously heard how the man accused of killing his ex-partner could have dug a grave before she disappeared
“How could the defendant be sure that nothing was recording to that DVR unit?” she said. “That this camera angle wouldn’t capture something.
“The only way he could be sure was to switch the cameras off - to switch off the thing that feeds into the unit. That’s what he did because he wasn’t going to take any risk that what he was doing that night would be captured.”
She said many of Lacomba’s stories to explain prosecution evidence - from the explanation of why he threw his phones in the River Thames, to why he had a damp woman’s top in his shed and why he had a large "grave-digger’s" shovel - had only come to light at trial, and had not been mentioned to police.
And Ms Morgan gave particular mention to the shovel, adding: “The shape and size make it perfect for one task and one task alone - digging a large hole as quickly as possible and there’s only one reason why at that time this defendant needed to dig such a hole.”
She also noted he had not appeared concerned about Sarah’s disappearance, had seemed unhappy about police attention at his home, had not appeared to be surprised by his arrest - and had not asked police any questions about Sarah’s whereabouts when he was arrested.
Read more from the trial:
She concluded: “He did not ask any questions because he knew all the answers,” said Ms Morgan, concluding her statement. “He knew all the answers because he killed her and then disposed of her body.
“She didn’t take her own life; she didn’t walk into the hands of another murderer.
"She was killed by this defendant in a deliberate, planned and careful act. It was careful, but he left traces - traces of evidence that now provide a compelling case against him and it’s on the basis of that compelling evidence that we invite you to conclude that you can be sure of his guilt.”
The trial continues.
For information on how we can report on court proceedings, click here
