Johnson, 29, has been committed to stand trial for the murder of Mr Alexander and formally pleaded not guilty in Bendigo County Court on Friday.
However, it will be at least another month before the fate of Oberin, 29, is known.
At the conclusion of the committal hearing, magistrate Russell Kelly said he needed time to consider whether there was enough evidence to commit Oberin to stand trial for murder after the accused’s defence counsel put forward several submissions.
Defence counsel Dermot Dann QC told the court Oberin was ‘‘not the person that killed Mr Alexander’’.
‘‘The evidence established is that he was in the shed at the time of the killing of Mr Alexander,’’ he said.
‘‘So in order to have a jury convict Mr Oberin on the crime of murder, the prosecution must rely on ... complicity.
‘‘The prosecution needs to be able to rely on evidence that would satisfy a jury beyond reasonable doubt that there was in fact an agreement on foot and it was on foot when Mr Alexander was killed.
‘‘It’s submitted there was no evidence of any agreement between these two men that Mr Alexander would be murdered .. seriously injured ... or shot.’’
Mr Dann said Oberin’s intention when attending Mr Alexander’s home was only to collect his late father’s stolen property and Johnson ‘‘went completely off-script’’.
‘‘He tells witnesses of his plan to go there. Why would he tell people if he was planning to kill Mr Alexander?’’ he said.
Mr Dann said this was further corroborated by Oberin going to the police station four hours after the shooting and telling officers he was at the crime scene but ‘‘I am innocent’’.
‘‘Yes he was there, yes he was obsessed about his stolen property ... yes he brought company but no, there is no evidence that in his mind, in front of witnesses, he would involve himself in a situation where someone would be murdered and he would be handing himself in three or four hours later. It just makes no sense,’’ Mr Dann said.
However, Crown Prosecutor Patrick Bourke said there was an agreement between the two accused, as they had driven together to the property, Oberin was aware there was a shotgun in the car and did not react when Johnson allegedly fired the first gunshot in the air and the second into Mr Alexander’s head.
‘‘Mr McDonald (witness) says the man comes out of the shed, has a bit of a look at the deceased and the two men leave,’’ Mr Bourke said.
‘‘The evidence isn’t ‘the man came out of the shed, had a look at the deceased and said Jesus Christ, what have you done here mate?’ Which you might expect if it had all gone off-script.’’
Mr Bourke also said witnesses only heard Oberin make demands for the CCTV unit, not the stolen property.
He said evidence suggested Oberin had animosity towards Mr Alexander not only because of the stolen property, but from the dead man’s sexual relationship with Oberin’s ex-girlfriend.
And while Oberin didn’t fire the fatal shot, Mr Bourke said ‘‘the one person shot is the person with whom Mr Oberin has animosity’’.
‘‘The man who is shot is the target of this expedition,’’ Mr Bourke said.
As such, Mr Bourke said there was enough evidence for a reasonable jury to convict Oberin on the charge of murder.
Mr Kelly adjourned the matter to March 16 to consider his decision. Oberin was remanded in custody.
Johnson was also remanded in custody and will face the Supreme Court for a directions hearing on March 1.
His defence counsel Rohan Cameron did not call any evidence or make any submissions during the committal hearing.
