Balodis outlined an alleged version of events leading up to June 27 that “provides some explanation and motive, the Crown says, for these accused to commit the offence”.

He told the court that Nazlioglu was recently released from prison, having been acquitted of murder, and was looking for ways to make money.

It’s alleged that on May 17 and 18, Nazlioglu – with the help of Heffer – hired an E-Class and a G-Class Mercedes-Benz from a Lansvale business offering short-term rentals for privately owned cars, and gave licence details with their Rhodes address.

“Now, Mr Nazlioglu did not return these vehicles since he kept the E-Class, and the G-Class was driven by an associate,” Balodis told the court.

The court heard a message was later sent to Heffer’s sister, telling her Heffer was uncontactable and asking for the car to be returned “before the situation is escalated”.

The Crown submitted that some men who knew the E-class Mercedes’ owner and were tasked with retrieving it visited the couple’s apartment car park in Rhodes and took the E-Class.

“[The car’s owner], it seems, has a passion for TikTok,” Balodis told the court.

“And on the 26th of May, he was up at Castlereagh Street … he was livestreaming. This was unfortunate because Jade Heffer saw his livestream and recognised the shops around them.”

The court was shown CCTV footage of a man getting out of a black E-Class Mercedes and a white Mercedes pulling up to it.

“That’s Mr Nazlioglu, and with the help of Ms Heffer, off he goes,” Balodis said, in reference to the E-Class being driven off. Balodis said there was “not much of a tale about the G-Class”, which was driven by Nazlioglu’s associate.

Balodis submitted there was some evidence that Khaled and the other man who they allege was in the VW Golf at the time of the alleged murder knew the owners of those luxury cars.

“We’re not going to lead any evidence that they have any personal animus towards Mr Nazlioglu,” Balodis said. “The motive, we say, has connection to these cars and to the evidence we have of [their] associations.”

The jury was shown CCTV snippets throughout the opening address, including of the moment Nazlioglu was shot in the car park. One man was seen pointing a pistol and then running behind a VW Golf with its brake lights on.

“In a lot of ways, this Crown case is made up of moments and preparations and one unsuccessful attempt,” Balodis told the court.

In the defence teams’ opening remarks, Atteya’s barrister, David Dalton, SC, told the court his client was not in the VW Golf when Nazlioglu was killed, nor in any other referenced cars on any other relevant dates.

The court heard Nazlioglu was killed within months of being acquitted and released from prison over the murder of former Comanchero boss Mick Hawi.

“And there will be evidence that there were, as far as he was concerned, a number of people that wanted to kill him and no mention of Mr Atteya in that context,” Dalton told the jury.

Khaled’s barrister, Scott Fraser, told the jury the Crown would attempt to link his client “to various cars at various points in time” and ask them “to draw conclusions from … CCTV footage and phone records,” but they must decide whether that information proved the Crown’s allegations.

There would be no evidence of any “history of animosity, a desire for revenge, or any ongoing feud” between Baltagi and Nazlioglu, the former’s barrister, Ertunc Ozen, SC, told the court.

He told the jury they must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Baltagi was involved in a plan to kill Nazlioglu.