Arson accused describes clash with his landlady

A jury was today due to begin deliberating whether an Auckland man deliberately set fire to his bedroom or was instead the victim of a vindictive landlady.

The 52-year-old, whose name, address and occupation are suppressed until noon today, faces a charge of arson stemming from the July 2003 blaze.

The offence carries a maximum 14-year prison term.

The fire claimed several of the man's personal items, including his false teeth.

Giving evidence in his own defence, the man yesterday told the Auckland District Court he had known the complainant, Sheryl King, most of his life, had lived with her "off and on" for about five years and had at one time been in a romantic relationship with her.

But by the time of the alleged offending, the pair's relationship was "more off than on".

The relationship had been punctuated by arguments. Police were called to the house once in 2002.

The man admitted going into Ms King's room during another row, over money, and setting fire to a piece of paper.

But he yesterday played down the significance of that incident.

"I did light it. It wasn't any big deal, it was just a bit of A4 [paper] ... with her rough bit of accounting written on it.

"I thought it might get her attention or something, I don't know."

He said he put the piece of paper out by stamping on it in the bedroom doorway.

He rejected an earlier claim by Ms King that she had had to put out the flames herself.

Arguments that ended with the man being ordered from the house were a common occurrence, so he was not surprised when he was thrown out in the July 2003 row, the court was told.

Ms King did, however, seem "a little more frantic" this time.

"I knew she wanted me out. How long for, I'm not sure."

She left the house at one point, returning with a trespass order against him.

After being served the order, the man "wandered around with the TV on, and ran a bath", as a preliminary to leaving.

He told the court that after getting out of the bath he made himself a hot drink before returning to his bedroom, only to find it ablaze.

The fire destroyed personal items, including correspondence to his dead father, genealogical records and marine charts.

"It was basically all important to me ... right down to my dentures and stuff."

The suggestion had been made that Ms King had started the fire herself, but that and other defence theories were dismissed as "nonsense on stilts" by Crown prosecutor Marc Corlett. Ms King had neither time nor reason to torch her own property, he said.

A 111 telephone recording played to the court recorded Ms King's reaction to her house catching fire. It was an emotional response "almost too painful to listen to".

Another defence argument, that a carelessly discarded cigarette had caused the fire, was also rejected by Mr Corlett during Crown closings.

He recounted evidence from two investigators who had identified up to five likely seats to the fire.

Judge Mary-Elizabeth Sharpe was expected to begin her summing-up this morning, before sending the jury to consider its verdict.