Accused triple murderer Darryl Young has faced intense questioning in court as prosecutors continued to challenge his account of the night three people were fatally sH๏τ at a rural Queensland property.

Young, 63, is on trial in the Queensland Supreme Court over the deaths of Merv Schwarz, Maree Schwarz and Graham Tighe, who were allegedly sH๏τ at the entrance to a property at Shannonvale on August 4, 2022.

He has pleaded not guilty to the murder charges and has also denied an allegation involving Ross Tighe. Throughout the proceedings, Young has maintained that he was not at the scene when the shootings occurred.

But during questioning, prosecutors focused on a series of pieces of evidence they say raise questions about his version of events.

One of the key issues was a spent ammunition casing found inside Young’s home.

The court previously heard evidence from a ballistics expert who said the casing was consistent with ammunition recovered from the scene of the shootings.

Prosecutor David Nardone questioned Young about how the casing could have ended up inside his kitchen and whether it could have come from the .30-30 rifle investigators believed was connected to the case.

Young rejected the suggestion that the ammunition belonged to him and continued to deny that he was responsible for the deaths.

The prosecution also questioned Young about surveillance cameras positioned at the Shannonvale property.

According to evidence presented in court, the cameras recorded the area at about 8.22pm on August 3, the night before the shootings. Around 11 minutes later, the footage stopped.

Prosecutors suggested Young had removed the cameras before the killings, potentially preventing them from recording what happened.

Young disputed that account.

He told the court that the cameras were not removed until the following morning, after he had arrived at the property.

The timing of the cameras has become another important point of disagreement between Young’s account and the prosecution’s case.

Prosecutors have also examined evidence from Sharon Young, a woman who was previously married to Young’s father for around two decades.

Sharon told the court that she and Darryl Young were simply friends.

However, prosecutors highlighted differences between what she told police shortly after the killings and what she later told the jury during the trial.

One disputed detail concerned the vehicle Young allegedly used when he returned home.

Sharon had previously told police that Young came back in a buggy. During her evidence in court, however, she said he returned in a car.

The timing of events surrounding the morning of the shootings also appeared to differ between her earlier police account and her evidence before the jury.

Prosecutor Monique Sheppard suggested that Sharon’s current version of events could have been reconstructed in a way that ᴀssisted Young.

Sharon rejected the suggestion.

Her evidence was further complicated by an audio-recorded conversation with police shortly before the trial began.

During that conversation, she reportedly said she could not remember what had happened on the day the three victims were sH๏τ and acknowledged that her memory was poor.

She was subsequently excused from the witness box.

The competing accounts have become a significant feature of the prosecution’s case, with prosecutors attempting to establish a timeline around Young’s movements and the events leading up to the shootings.

The defence, meanwhile, continues to dispute the allegations and has challenged the interpretation of the evidence against Young.

The trial has centred on what happened at the Shannonvale property and whether the physical evidence, surveillance footage and witness accounts can establish Young’s involvement beyond reasonable doubt.

For the prosecution, the ammunition casing, the disappearance of surveillance footage and inconsistencies in witness evidence form part of a broader argument about Young’s movements and actions.

For the defence, however, those circumstances do not necessarily establish that Young committed the killings.

The court has heard evidence from multiple witnesses and experts as prosecutors work through their case. Young’s own evidence has also come under sustained scrutiny as the prosecution attempts to test his explanation of events.

The allegations are serious, but no finding of guilt has been made.

Young remains enтιтled to the presumption of innocence unless and until the jury reaches a verdict.

The trial was adjourned until 9am on Monday, when proceedings are expected to continue in the Queensland Supreme Court.