In their summation, the prosecution stated that the evidence they presented proved that Einem's story was full of lies and inconsistencies, and that he did murder (with the help of others) Kelvin. They also stated that his admission that he had picked up Kelvin showed that he was in contact with him on 5 June; that the fibres and hairs proved that Einem was with him at the time of just before and/or at the time of death; and that the drugs proved Einem was with Kelvin in between those times. The prosecution also answered the doubts raised by the defence about when on 10 July the body was dumped at the airstrip by suggesting that Einem could have dumped the body sometime very late on 10 July or in the early morning of 11 July before going to work for the day. The defence stated in their summary that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Einem was guilty of murder and also were not able to establish the exact cause of Kelvin's death, so therefore the jury must give Einem the benefit of the doubt. Justice White then gave his summation of the trial, and in the early afternoon of 5 November 1984, the jury retired to consider their verdict. After 7.5 hours of deliberation, the jury returned to give their verdict. Einem was found guilty of the murder and was automatically sentenced to life at Yatala Labour Prison. Justice White imposed a non-parole period of 24 years. Under South Australian law, a third of the non-parole period could be taken off for good behaviour in prison. Based on this reckoning, Einem could conceivably have been eligible for parole in late 1999. The Attorney-General of South Australia immediately appealed the leniency of the non-parole period, and on 29 March 1985 the Court of Criminal Appeal in South Australia increased the non-parole period to 36 years, a record at the time in that state. The earliest Einem could be released on parole was therefore on 31 October 2007 (after allowing for the fact that a third of the non-parole period could be taken off for good behaviour in prison). Einem's defence team (now consisting of barrister David Peek with assistance from Helena Jasinski) appealed the conviction to the Court of Criminal Appeal in South Australia and requested that a new trial be set. The basis for this appeal was the evidence given about Kelvin's heterosexuality, the references to Einem's own homosexuality through the trial and the negative impact that might have had on the jury, and also how Mr. Justice White in his summation did not include reference to the testimony given by Einem's relative about his attendance at the birthday party on the day Kelvin's body was dumped.