David Pomphret murdered wife Ann-Marie with crowbar, court hears

‘Beloved’ mum Ann-Marie Pomphret died after suffering ‘catastrophic’ head injuries at a stables off Old Alder Lane in Burtonwood in November last year.

Ann-Marie Pomphret

Husband David Pomphret, 51, is currently on trial at Liverpool Crown Court charged with her murder.

The court heard today, Monday, that the couple lived with their daughter Megan, 18, on Masefield Drive in Winwick – also owning the land on Old Alder Lane, where they kept horses.

On Friday, November 2 2018, both David and Ann-Marie Pomphret had completed a number of normal day-to-day activities.

David left home at around 7am and visited Tesco Extra on Winwick Road on his way to work at Barclays’ base in Knutsford, where he worked as a solutions architect and associate vice president.

Having left work at shortly after 1.30pm, he later took the couple’s Nissan Qashqai to a garage in Manchester.

Meanwhile, Ann-Marie – who was receiving treatment for cancer – had also visited the Tesco store with Megan before dropping their daughter at Priestley College.

She visited Orford Jubilee Neighbourhood that morning, while later on David and Ann-Marie shopped together at Asda in Golborne.

After 8pm, they were both present at the stables.

There, David Pomphret hit his wife over the head more than 30 times with a crowbar before dumping the weapon in a nearby pond.

He returned home to the Winwick Park estate in the Nissan Qashqai and sent a series of supposedly concerned texts to her phone.

Pomphret then drove both the Qashqai and his Volvo car to the stables, before dialling 999 at 9.47pm and telling an emergency call handler that he had ‘just found his wife dead at the stables’.

During the call, the defendant added: “My wife came to the stables a couple of hours ago and I’ve not been able to get her on the phone, so I have just come down to the stables and she is laying on the floor in a pool of blood.

“It looks like she has had her head beaten in.”

When asked what time he had last seen his wife, he gave three different answers – first saying it was first around 9.20pm, then 9.50pm.

Pomphret then went on to say that he did not wear a watch, and that it was ‘an hour-and-a-half or two hours ago’.

Over the phone, he continued: “Who would have done this, who has done this to my wife?”

Prosecution barrister Gordon Cole told the court: “We now know that it was he who had done this to his wife.

“At the very outset, and for some time, this defendant said that he had simply found his wife.

“He did not admit that he had killed her for many months, in fact not until well after he had been charged.”

“This, we now know, was a complete pack of lies.”

David Pomphret disposed of some of his clothing, and 'repeatedly denied having anything to do with the killing of his wife' under interview.

Mr Cole added: “At times, it seems the defendant became confused, would apologise for becoming confused and then start up again from where he stopped.

“Throughout, he seemed very upset and shocked.

“There were points where he appeared as though he was going to cry, but then no tears would come."

Having initially been arrested the day after his wife’s killing, David Pomphret was eventually charged with murder five months later after a ‘very careful police enquiry’ – in which officers pieced together CCTV footage, phone data and other evidence.

The prosecution alleged that the ‘opportunity to murder his wife presented itself’ after he learned that their daughter was staying at a friend’s house that night.

But David Pomphret denies murder, having instead pleaded guilty to manslaughter ‘due to a loss of control’.

Mr Cole said: "He only admitted manslaughter when all the evidence had been obtained and it was clear to him that he had no choice – he elected to tell lie after lie in the hope that the police would not be able to piece together the evidence to show his guilt.

"He decided, for whatever reason, that he was going to kill his wife.

"The severity of the force shows that he intended to kill.”

Defence barrister Richard Pratt told the court that the attack had been set against the background of a volatile and abusive relationship, and that Ms Pomphret had become angered that her husband planned to do DIY that evening when she wanted a quiet night in.

She ‘ranted and raved’ and called her husband ‘useless’, before insulting the couple’s daughter ‘using the most horrible language’.

Mr Pratt said that his client had ‘snapped’ as a result of this.

He added: "When you consider that the defendant might have lost his self-control, we invite you to consider this.

"First of all, the sheer normality of the day leading up to the time when he must have killed his wife.

"The second thing is the severity of the attack – does that smack of a controlled person, or might it indicate someone who is frenzied and has lost complete control?

"And the third thing is to have regard to the defendant's character – what prompted that attack from a person of impeccable character?

"Over the years, David Pomphret was a model of self-control, patience and restraint – he had extraordinary powers of self-restraint.

"Without wishing to speak ill of the dead, the deceased was at times a highly volatile character – sometimes prone to violent rages out of the most trivial detail.

"For years, the defendant coped with that, but sometimes it can build up and build up – the loss of control doesn't have to be sudden.

"He was a quiet and calm individual, who in the face of abusive anger and sometimes violence developed a coping strategy not to react.

"After a day spent at work and shopping, things changed forever – a quiet man finally snapped.

"This was a man who had completely lost his normal character and self-control.”

The trial before judge David Aubrey continues, and is set to last for 10 days.

Follow our live coverage of today's hearing by clicking here.