A woman accused of starting a house fire that burnt her dog to death told police she couldn't bear thinking about the animal's last moments, trying to find a way to escape.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
But police told Charlemagne Michelle List, 42, they believed the dog was killed after she deliberately started the fire using methylated spirits.
Ms List is now on trial in the ACT Supreme Court for an alleged insurance fraud, facing charges of arson, attempting to obtain property by deception and obtaining property by deception.
Her Kambah public housing property was gutted by an intense fire in July 2012.
Her dog was inside, probably getting in through an open back door and was killed as it tried to hide from the flames in the toilet.
Ms List made an insurance claim for about $50,000 and received an emergency payment of about $2000.
But police became suspicious of the cause and eventually brought Ms List in for an interview, a recording of which was played to Justice Hilary Penfold on Tuesday.
Ms List told the police she had left the house with her daughters to go to the library.
One of the daughters said she thought she saw flames through the window but List told police she looked back, couldn't see anything and continued on her way.
She said she wasn't concerned when she saw smoke rising nearby, thinking it was from a nearby chimney, nor when she saw a firefighting pumper drive towards the scene, assuming it was destined for another house.
Fire investigators later found evidence to suggest an accelerant had been used and methylated spirits bottles were seized from Ms List's recycling bin and her laundry.
Ms List told police she had bought three bottles of methylated spirits for cleaning in the days before the fire and used them on the floors and the TV unit, near where the fire is thought to have started. Police told her that didn't make sense.
''I clean my home and I can assure you that I don't use three bottles of metho,'' one of the detectives said.
''Well I do,'' Ms List replied.
''No normal person does … none of what you are telling me makes sense. It's not fitting.''
She told police she was not a ''dog lover'' but that her biggest regret was that her daughters had lost their dog.
''Even if I hated that dog, I wouldn't let that happen, that's just cruel,'' she said. ''To think of him stuck behind that toilet trying to find a way to get out … ''
Police said they also noticed that old family photos, books, Islamic artwork and other ''important'' items had been moved to the shed, under a tarpaulin that police said looked ''quite new''.
Nearing the end of the interview, the detectives told Ms List they knew the fire had been started with an accelerant and had been started by either her or her daughters.
They told her she was the last one inside the home and was seen by her daughters near the TV unit.
''I want you to have a really good think, because right here, right now, is your opportunity to tell the truth,'' a detective said. ''What I think happened is that you started the fire at your house. I want to give you a moment [to think about it].''
Ms List replied: ''I don't need a moment. I didn't do it. I didn't set my house on fire.
''I don't know what else I can do or say to convince you.''
The trial continues before Justice Penfold on Wednesday.
