Crown prosecutor Pip Currie said at the trial that the "intent" was proved by the deliberateness of Frost's actions. He had deliberately armed himself, pocketed three cartridges, went next door, loaded the firearm, identified a target and made a decision to take aim at the most vulnerable part of the body (the head). At close range he pulled the trigger before breaking open the gun, ejecting the spent shell, reloading and repeating the shooting process.
At today's sentencing, five victim impact statements were read out from Mr Schist's children, and Mr Hutchison's mother, stepfather, uncle and aunt.
All wrote in their reports that they could not understand why Frost had killed, as he was a friend of their father.
One son, Alan Schist, had wanted to hit Frost on the head with a stick and he was annoyed and frustrated he could no longer give his father a cuddle and would now miss out on what other sons took for granted.
Murray Schist wrote that Frost had shattered his family's lives and because "Jeff got on well with dad it makes the whole affair harder to deal with".
Justice Miller said it was "inevitable" that Frost would receive life imprisonment. The only question was over the parole period.
Frost's previous good character merited some discount, as did the mental difficulties he was having at the time of the murders and his remorse.
Before Frost was sentenced this morning, Justice Miller heard a submission from his new lawyer, James Rappley, who said Frost would have admitted his guilt, and therefore be eligible for a substantial discount to the overall sentence, had he been properly advised before his trial by his lawyer at the time, Doug Taffs.
Frost told the court that his pre-trial contact with Mr Taffs had consisted of a couple of meetings in the court cells, or at the Christchurch Men's Prison. He was never informed that there would be a discount for an early guilty plea.
"I have never denied my guilt. I mean, I am the person that dialled 111," Frost told the court this morning.
Frost said his defence was initially going to be temporary insanity but when psychiatric reports ruled that out he was advised to run a defence of "lack of intent".
"I had no intent at all. I mean, Frank was a good friend of mine. I'm still dumbfounded why this incident happened at all. I think, medically, something has gone wrong, but I'm no expert."
Mr Taffs said he had outlined the strength of the prosecution case to Frost on several occasions, but it was not his practice to tell clients how to plead.
"I always made it clear to Mr Frost that he was in charge of his plea," Mr Taffs said this morning.
"He accepted right from the start that he was going to be receiving substantial imprisonment here, on a guilty or not guilty plea. Mr Frost was always adamant that he had not intended any harm and was determined that he should be defended."
When Mr Rappley alleged that Mr Taffs had run the trial as he saw fit, without taking instructions from his client, Mr Taffs retorted:
"My job is to do the best I can; it's not to overrule his stated preference. But he was always of the opinion that he was not intending to commit murder."
Mr Rappley asked Justice Miller to give Frost credit for a "notional" guilty plea.
"He is a simple man with no experience of the court environment. He should have been taken through the evidence very carefully and shown there was no defence."
