SHAUN Johnson was "harbouring resentment and intent on seeking retribution" when he brought a knife to a Boxing Day backyard BBQ at Mayfield and accused Steven O'Brien of having an affair with his partner, Newcastle Supreme Court has heard.
The response he received, that Mr O'Brien had "higher standards than that", was the "flashpoint" in a drunken confrontation that led Johnson to "lash out" and with a backhanded slash cut Mr O'Brien's throat, causing him to quickly bleed to death.
Johnson, now 38, has pleaded not guilty to murder, but guilty to manslaughter, admitting to stabbing Mr O'Brien but claiming he was acting as a result of excessive self-defence.
What happened in those crucial minutes before the stabbing, while three men sat around the table in Mr O'Brien's backyard, has been the focus of a week-long judge-alone trial in Newcastle Supreme Court.
And during his closing address on Wednesday, Crown prosecutor Neil Adams, SC, said Johnson had "lashed out in anger" and everything he had done leading up to the stabbing was "inconsistent with acting in self-defence".
Mr O'Brien, 50, his family and friends spent Boxing Day 2019 at his home in Silsoe Street, Mayfield, and were in the backyard when Johnson joined them later in the evening.
The group were all drinking alcohol and socialising happily for a number of hours, witnesses have said.
But sometime after Mr O'Brien's parents had gone to bed - leaving only Mr O'Brien, Johnson and Billy Gee - they key witness in the trial - in the backyard an argument started between Mr O'Brien and Johnson.
According to a Crown case statement handed up to Justice Richard Cavanagh at the outset of the trial, Mr Gee told police they were all sitting at the table when Johnson said: "My missus went out last night and I don't know where she went."
Mr O'Brien, according to Mr Gee, replied: "Well she didn't come here", to which Johnson replied: "Well it's my turn out tonight."
During his closing address, Mr Adams said during his evidence Mr Gee had provided more detail about what was said during the confrontation.
"It wasn't simply a matter of I don't need to touch her and I wouldn't touch her," Mr Adams said. "It goes to the point where the deceased insults the accused and says I've got higher standards than that and that is referred to by Mr Gee as the flashpoint. That gives rise not to an issue of self-defence, but striking out in anger."
Defence barrister Chris Watson used his closing address to be critical of Mr Gee's evidence, questioning the accuracy and honesty of his account and said the evidence pointed towards Mr Gee being the "initial aggressor".
He said the evidence about what happened before the stabbing had not been "fleshed out", but submitted Johnson was "set upon" by Mr Gee and probably Mr O'Brien.
"We say that there is a physical attack on the accused that caused him the requisite amount of concern and fear to defend himself in the way that he did," Mr Watson said.
"We say that self-defence arises."
Justice Cavanagh will deliver judgement at a later date.
The Crown case is that the accused has come to the house at the very least as a provocateur in a situation where he is going to ferment conflict and confrontation.
Crown prosecutor Neil Adams, SC, said.
