The Crown made its submissions in the Court of Appeals yesterday in the case of convicted Lagoon Park murderer Robert Blair Tucker and co-defendant James Alan (Spook) Dill who was convicted on a lesser charge of manslaughter.

The four-month Lagoon Park murder trial concluded last year with Tucker receiving a life sentence for stabbing and killing American drug dealer Stanley Lee on July 1, 2001.

Dill was given a ten-year sentence for manslaughter while Terranz Smith was freed.

Smith showed showed Police and lawyer Larry Scott where the body was hidden.

Dill?s lawyer Elizabeth Christopher said yesterday her client was ?intoxicated or impaired by drugs? when he gave his statement, thus rendering it unreliable or involuntary.

Mr. Wolffe suggested that statements obtained from both Dill and Tucker were made voluntarily.

He said the 2,000 pages of evidence in the case did not support Ms Christopher?s argument because Dill was told about his legal rights and his statements were ?made in his own free will?.

Ms Christopher argued that Dill was ?misled? by Police about the real intention of questioning and said her client should have been informed that he was a suspect in a murder case.

Mr. Wolffe said Police were allowed to question anyone who might provide them with useful information whether they were suspects or not.

He added that when Dill was arrested on August 11, 2001, six hours after Smith supplied them with information which connected him to the deceased through drugs, he had not been a suspect in the murder.

?It was only after he was arrested and questioned about the drugs that Police received information that he might be involved in the murder,? he said.

Mr. Wolffe said Dill had been cautioned and asked if he wanted a lawyer, but Dill had said no adding that he ?did not kill nobody?.

Mr. Wolffe told the court that at that stage Police identified themselves as being part of an investigating team looking into the murder, adding that at no time was Dill questioned against his will or ?forced? into making a statement.

However, when the second statement was made, Police once again asked Dill if he wanted a lawyer and he requested Mr. Scott.

Mr. Wolffe said Smith, initially the co-accused at the time, was represented by Mr. Scott who was present when Smith showed Police where the body was.

He said Mr. Scott was also present when statements were made by Tucker, as he represented him as well.

?Tucker knew Smith was cutting a deal and each tried to save his own skin by giving evidence against the other,? Mr. Wolffe added.

He said there was no evidence to support Mr. Scott?s suggestion that Tucker was forced to sign a statement, or not informed of his rights as he had been given a ?notice to prisoners? when first arrested on August 9, 2001 and that Mr. Scott has been present when all the statements were made.

The case continues this morning.