A defence barrister has described his own client as "duplicitous" and a "shit-talker" during closing submissions in his trial for attempted murder.
Connor John Manns, 25, is accused of firing three shots at another man — who cannot be named — with intent to kill him, in the Canberra suburb of Casey in the early hours of November 21, 2021.
The ACT Supreme Court previously heard the pair had agreed to meet after a dispute which had played out over the messaging app Snapchat.
Mr Manns has argued he was only trying to scare the other man, rather than kill him, despite suggesting the opposite in subsequent messages to a friend.
"I tried to kill him last night … x3 in the head," Mr Manns wrote.
"I'm so dirty … this little thing [.25 calibre firearm] so hard to hit what aiming for."
Defence barrister James Maher asked the jury to consider the possibility that his client was exuding "fake bravado", and used his closing arguments to question his own client's credibility.
"He has a clear track record of being duplicitous and talking shit," Mr Maher told the court.
He referred to various instances in which Mr Manns had sent screenshots of private conversations to other people, and said it reflected a level of deceit.
But prosecutor Marcus Dyason said the text messages amounted to an admission, and should weigh heavily on the jury's deliberations.
"He was so angry with [the complainant] he wanted to see blood," Mr Dyason told the court.
"When he fired those three shots … he did so with murder in his mind."
The jury had earlier heard evidence of other messages, in which Mr Manns described the dispute as "war" and said he didn't care if he got sentenced to life in prison for killing the complainant.
Alleged victim was a 'sitting duck'
The court also heard disagreement about whether the details of the shots themselves reflected a desire to kill or not.
Mr Maher said the evidence shows at least one of the shots was fired at a downward angle, and not at the complainant's head.
He also described the complainant as a "sitting duck" and argued if Mr Manns had wanted to kill him, he wouldn't have fired three shots from a moving vehicle in dark and wet conditions.
But Mr Dyason argued the very fact that three shots were fired suggested the accused's intention was to kill.
"If it was just an effort to scare … one shot might have been considered a warning," he said.
"[Three shots] goes well beyond an effort to scare."
The jury will receive its final directions from Justice Chrissa Loukas-Karlsson, and is expected to begin deliberations on Tuesday.
