THE MAN accused of killing Janet Muller by burning her in the boot of a car could get sent to prison for manslaughter after the jury was sent out.

In an alteration in the trial of Christopher Raymond Jeffrey-Shaw, 28, of no fixed address, Lord Justice Jeremy Stuart-Smith told Guildford Crown Court the jury may return a verdict of manslaughter or murder.

Yesterday, both the prosecution and the defence made their closing speeches as members of both the Muller and Jeffrey-Shaw family watched from the public gallery.

Instead of being tasked with a straight-up guilty or not guilty of murder decision, the jury can now consider manslaughter.

The lesser charge would only materialise if the jury was satisfied Jeffrey-Shaw did not pick up Janet Muller from Brighton on the evening of March 12 or the early hours of March 13, beat her, put her in the boot and then set fire to the car, as argued by the prosecution.

Jeffrey-Shaw told jurors on Wednesday he had been ordered to torch the car by a traveller called Steven who he owed money to.

The pair, and an unknown man, were at the same house as the 21-year-old victim in Crawley about two hours before her body was found in the burning car in Rusper Road at 2.30pm on March 13, according to the defence.

The defence claims the defendant had been told she had been killed in a robbery and believed her body was elsewhere, in which case he would be not guilty of any crime.

But if the jury is satisfied he knew the body was in the boot but believed Janet Muller to have already been dead - as he claims he was told by the unknown man - then he would be found guilty of manslaughter.

In summing up, Lord Stuart-Smith said: "The prosecution say you can be sure he took her out of Brighton and knew she was in the boot when he set fire to the car.

"The defence say he's the innocent victim of circumstance and that he had no knowledge at all she was in the boot of his car.

"Ultimately this is a case about fact rather than law, which is why you are the most important people in this court and particularly in this case.

"And you must decide what happened.

"You must be sure Jeffrey-Shaw murdered Miss Muller."

The trial continues.

EIGHT STRANDS OF EVIDENCE IN JANET MURDER TRIAL

THE verdict will rely on eight key strands of evidence put forward in the complex case of the murder of Janet Muller.

With so many unknowns in the story that leads to the 21-year-old’s death, the prosecution is relying on these crucial eight pieces of information.

The first is the coincidence of timing of Jeffrey-Shaw being in Brighton and Janet Muller’s disappearance, coupled with Janet making her way to where Jeffrey-Shaw is known to have been earlier, in the early hours of March 13.

The defence argues Jeffrey-Shaw being in Brighton when Janet Muller went missing does not mean he met up with her.

There is a distance of 0.8 miles from where his mobile phone pinged off a mast and where she was last seen.

Prosecutor Philip Bennetts said: “He says he travelled to Brighton handing out pieces of paper with a telephone number on them asking people if they want to buy drugs.

“That’s his explanation for being in Brighton.

“The advantage that has, it gives an explanation of any movements in Brighton, only he knows the truth about what he was up to.

“And no doubt he has weaved the account he has through that.”

Another connection, according to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), is evidence that Jeffrey-Shaw has a home in Beckenham and that Janet Muller’s partner also lived in Beckenham.

Again, the defence said it was immaterial.

The prosecution also points at the fact Jeffrey-Shaw headed north 23 minutes after the last seen sighting of Janet Muller.

Jeffrey-Shaw told the court on Wednesday he left Brighton because he was asked, by a traveller he was working for, to pay off a debt by collecting bags from three addresses in Crawley and Croydon.

The next point of contention for the CPS is the fact Jeffrey-Shaw’s car took a much longer time to go 20 miles north than it had done coming south.

The defendant put it down to stopping off at those addresses to pick up three bags on behalf of the man he owed money to – Steve the traveller.

The prosecution also said the fact Jeffrey-Shaw did go back to Beckenham indicates he murdered Janet Muller.

Defending, Bernard Tetlow told jurors that this was because he had travelled back to his mother’s home to stay the night.

The sixth strand, according to prosecuting counsel Philip Bennetts, is the timings and positions of the car up to the incident in Rusper Road where Janet Muller’s body is found in the boot of the burnt-out Volkswagen Jetta.

Jeffrey-Shaw is seen buying petrol in a can in a Tesco petrol station in Three Bridges.

But his defence states this was because he’d been told by Steve the traveller to burn the car and that he was on his way to do just that having left the house in Crawley.

The prosecution also stated that Janet Muller was in the boot of his hire car when he set it alight, something the defence said came about because Steve and another unknown man had put her there.

Mr Bennetts said: “To demonstrate he was such a caring man, he says it was horrible, he was being sick.

“Does he go to ask for help?

“No, he’s off.

“Into London, out, and then what?

“We’re back to the first account – someone has robbed the car.”

“You can be satisfied so you’re sure that Janet Muller was in that car at 1.38am, he knew she was in that car when he set alight to it.”

The final piece of evidence is that Janet Muller had taken cocaine some time in the 24 hours before her death and that Jeffrey-Shaw was a cocaine dealer.

Defending, Mr Tetlow said Janet Muller appeared to be high and hyperactive when she was seen in a house in Crawley two hours before her death.

He said Jeffrey-Shaw did not have drugs because he was simply working off a drug debt, and that it was more likely that it was Steve who had provided the 21-year-old with drugs.

Police have not been able to identify the man being named as Steve by the defence.

Mr Tetlow said: “It’s not surprising that he’s in a state of shock and confusion because he has just set fire to a car and then discovers afterwards there is a body in the boot and it’s too late for him to do anything about it.

“He knows he’s responsible for what eventually happened.

“But he hasn’t murdered Janet Muller.

“He’s responsible for setting fire to the car, but not murdering her.

“No motive.

“Janet Muller was not with Mr Jeffrey-Shaw that night at all and there’s no evidence she was.

“She was with the cocaine dealer, Steven, and his accomplices first of all in Brighton and then Crawley.”

The prosecution states Christopher Jeffrey-Shaw made up a fake account of what happened, hanging this on the facts once being presented with the case report in June of last year.

They claim he picked Janet Muller up shortly after she was last seen alive in Hove at 1.13am on March 13, beats her with a blunt object, put her in the boot and set fire to that car a little more than 12 hours later in Rusper Road, Crawley, having spent the night in Beckenham.

Mr Tetlow, defending, told jurors: “And what we submit to you, is that based on the evidence, the prosecution’s case is a completely unproven theory. It’s not compelling, there are many doubts, many inconsistencies, and there being so many gaps, you cannot reach that very high standard [of being sure].

“And you must give the benefit of that doubt to Mr Jeffrey-Shaw.”