The man who lit the fatal Loafers Lodge blaze has been found guilty of five counts of murder, and guilty of one count of arson.
The 50-year-old, who can now be named as Esarona David Lologa, set the Wellington boarding house alight in May 2023. Michael Wahrlich, Melvin Parun, Peter O'Sullivan, Kenneth Barnard and Liam Hockings were killed in the blaze.
There were gasps and whispered exclamations of "yes" from the public gallery when the verdict was read.
Photo: RNZ/Mark Papalii
The victims' families were among those present. Some were in tears.
It was never disputed Lologa lit the fire, but he pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.
He has been on trial at the High Court in Wellington for the last five weeks.
His name was suppressed until Friday, but Justice Peter Churchman ordered it be lifted at the end of the trial.
The Crown's case
The Crown said Lologa, who had schizophrenia, lit the fire because he no longer wanted to live at Loafers Lodge, a hostel he'd told people he didn't like.
Esarona David Lologa was found guilty. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
The Crown called around 100 witnesses over its four weeks of evidence.
They included Loafers Lodge residents who described their harrowing escapes from the blaze, firefighters who fought tears recounting their experiences, and crucially, five mental health professionals who believed Lologa was not insane when he lit the fire.
The experts said Lologa did know his actions were morally wrong.
They pointed to Lologa's own comments to police and psychiatrists, including that he had "done nothing wrong", as evidence he understood the difference between right and wrong.
They also recounted inconsistencies in his accounts of that night and his mental health at the time, saying that called into question his own narrative that voices in his head told him to light the fire.
During closing arguments, Crown lawyer Grant Burston said the defence had "not even come close" to proving Lologa was insane at the time.
He said the sole psychiatrist called by the defence, Dr Krishna Pillai took a "blinkered approach" to reach his "fundamentally flawed" opinion.
Dr Krishna Pillai Photo: Pool
The defence arguments
Lologa's lawyers argued he was insane when he lit the fire.
They called Pillai to support that, who told the court he believed that on balance, Lologa was incapable of understanding his actions were morally wrong.
Pillai pointed to CCTV footage the day of the fire showing the Lologa's agitation as he was "pounding" up and down the stairs and through the halls of Loafers Lodge.
There was evidence Lologa suffered a "serious psychotic relapse", he said.
Pillai relied on Lologa's 'self-report' of his mental state at the time.
Lologa told Pillai, and other psychiatrists, that he lit the fire because voices in his head told him that was the only way to stop people he believed were out to get him.
The defence rejected the Crown's assertion Lologa lit the fire because he wanted to get better accommodation, saying there was no evidence to support that.
Lologa will be sentenced in November. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
"If you were to go with that theory, you would have to involve yourself in massive guesswork and speculation," Louise Sziranyi told the jury.
There was no reason for Lologa to light the fire other than mental unwellness, she said, arguing Lologa was more mentally unwell than anyone realised.
The defence of insanity and the burden of proof
The defence of insanity relies on three factors: the person must have a "disease of the mind" and not understand what they were doing, or that it was morally wrong.
The first two points were not in dispute - Lologa had schizophrenia and both sides agreed he knew what he was doing.
The final point being argued was whether he knew lighting the fire was morally wrong, and knew people could die as a result.
The Crown called five experts who said Lologa was not insane when he lit the fire, and knew it was wrong.
The defence called one psychiatrist who argued the contrary.
It was the Crown's job to prove the murder and arson charges beyond reasonable doubt.
But in raising the defence of insanity, Lologa's lawyers had to prove he was insane on the balance of probabilities - that is, that it's more likely than not that he was insane at the time.
That was a lower threshold than "beyond reasonable doubt".
Speaking after the verdict, police lead investigator Tim Leitch said he was always emotional at these times and this was no exception.
"I'm just pleased that we got the result that we were looking for.
"And I know that it has given some comfort to the [families] that we've held somebody to account for the death of the men."
Leitch said it was an extremely challenging investigation, with a huge volume of information to pull together.
He said there were hundreds and hundreds of hours of CCTV to piece together, and they spoke to more than 90 residents to get their accounts of what happened that night.
Lologa will be sentenced on the 21st of November
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
