The short version
- A close friend testified that Jesse Baird was terrified of Beau Lamarre-Condon due to his status as an armed police officer.
- Baird feared the accused would make false allegations that could destroy his career in children's television and sports officiating.
- The defense argues the shooting occurred during a struggle where the officer acted in self-defense after entering the home disguised as a delivery driver.
The Supreme Court of New South Wales heard harrowing testimony regarding the state of mind of Jesse Baird, one of two men fatally shot at his Sydney residence in February 2024. Corey-Dean Thorpe, a former partner and close friend of Baird, broke down while describing the intense fear Baird experienced toward Beau Lamarre-Condon, the police officer currently on trial for their murders. The prosecution alleges that Lamarre-Condon developed an obsessive infatuation with Baird during a brief relationship, leading to escalating controlling behavior as Baird attempted to end the connection in late 2023.
Thorpe told Justice Natalie Adams that Baird was petrified of Lamarre-Condon primarily because the accused was an armed member of the police force. This fear was not merely about physical violence but also centered on professional ruin. Baird, a television presenter for the children’s program Totally Wild and an Australian Football League umpire, required specific certifications to work with minors. He expressed deep concern that Lamarre-Condon could fabricate allegations against him, which would effectively end his career in these fields.
The court heard that Baird sought advice from Thorpe on how to safely terminate the relationship, citing both the presence of a firearm and a history of stalking and control by Lamarre-Condon. Despite these fears, Baird managed to distance himself for several months. In early February 2024, he reportedly expressed relief to a friend that he had not heard from the accused, stating he was done with the situation and planning to move house to sever the final ties Lamarre-Condon had to his life.
During this period of separation, Baird began a new relationship with Luke Davies. Thorpe described Baird as exceptionally happy with Davies, noting that the new partner brought a sense of joy and stability that was evident in their interactions. This newfound happiness stood in stark contrast to the anxiety and dread Baird had exhibited during his time with Lamarre-Condon. The timeline suggests that Baird felt he was finally escaping a dangerous dynamic just weeks before the fatal incident occurred.
On February 19, 2024, Lamarre-Condon allegedly disguised himself as an Uber Eats delivery driver to gain entry into Baird’s Paddington home. Once inside, he used a police service weapon to shoot and kill both Baird and Davies. Lamarre-Condon has pleaded not guilty to two counts of murder and one charge of aggravated break and enter. The prosecution contends that the shooting was a premeditated act driven by obsession and jealousy, rather than a spontaneous reaction to an immediate threat.
The defense team presents a markedly different narrative of the events inside the Paddington apartment. Lawyer John Stratton SC argued that Lamarre-Condon entered the property lawfully or under duress and that a physical struggle ensued between the parties. According to this account, the shots were fired in self-defense during the altercation. The defense suggests that the officer felt threatened by Baird and Davies, leading to a tragic but legally justified use of force.
The trial continues to explore the complex dynamics between the victims and the accused, focusing on whether Lamarre-Condon’s actions were motivated by malice or perceived necessity. The emotional testimony from Thorpe provides insight into the psychological pressure Baird felt, highlighting the unique dangers posed by an abuser with access to state-issued weapons and institutional authority. This context is central to the prosecution’s argument that Baird’s fear was rational and well-founded.
As proceedings continue, the court will examine digital evidence, witness statements, and forensic data to determine the sequence of events leading to the deaths. The case has drawn significant attention due to the accused’s position within law enforcement and the nature of the alleged crimes. The outcome may have broader implications for how police misconduct and domestic violence involving officers are prosecuted in Australia.
The juxtaposition of Baird’s reported relief at escaping Lamarre-Condon with the sudden violence that followed underscores the volatility of the situation. While the defense maintains that the officer acted to protect himself, the prosecution emphasizes the pattern of control and the specific fears Baird voiced about his safety and livelihood. The jury must weigh these competing accounts to reach a verdict on charges that carry life imprisonment if convicted.
Legal observers note that the case tests the boundaries of self-defense claims when one party is a law enforcement officer. The ability of Lamarre-Condon to access a service weapon and use it in a domestic setting adds a layer of complexity to the trial. As more witnesses testify, the full scope of the relationship and the final moments before the shooting will become clearer, providing the jury with the necessary facts to decide on guilt or innocence.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian World↗Jesse Baird ‘petrified’ of Beau Lamarre-Condon and kept repeating ‘he has a gun’, court hears
