Brianna Ghey murder suspect compared to 'Tesco meal deal' by own defence
A boy accused of the murder of Brianna Ghey has been compared to a Tesco meal deal by his own defence counsel.
The 16-year-old and a girl the same age, who cannot be named for legal reasons, are on trial charged with murdering Brianna, who was stabbed 28 times in the head, neck, back and chest during a "sustained and violent assault" in Culcheth Linear Park in Warrington on February 11 this year. Girl X and Boy Y both deny this count and "blame each other".
Deanna Heer KC told Manchester Crown Court during the prosecution's opening last month that messages between the two youths in the weeks and months before the stabbing "showed a preoccupation with violence and torture and death". The then 15-year-olds were also said to have discussed killing other children they knew.
Richard Littler KC delivered his closing speech on behalf of Boy Y to a jury of seven men and five women on Tuesday, which he opened by saying: "If this case were a play, it would definitely be a tragedy. The script would have been written by Girl X. It would have been directed by Girl X, it would have been stage managed by Girl X, it would have been produced by Girl X and the central character would have been Girl X.
"The central issue in the case is whether you can be sure whether Boy Y was part of the cast or just an extra drafted in for that afternoon on the 11th of February in Culcheth. Was he a fully paid up member of the plan?"
Man in 30s dies after being stabbed in park sparking police probe
Mr Littler referenced how his client had given evidence to the court by typing his answers after being diagnosed with selective mutism. He told jurors: "We don’t mock an individual for how they look or behave and if someone enjoys admiring trees or admiring the craftsmanship of a knife that his dad bought for him on holiday, well that’s ok.
"You know that Boy Y has now formally been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. How that has an impact on his anxiety, his presentation and, importantly you might think in the context of this case, his communication skills. Maybe your conclusion was that he was utterly devoid of any social confidence. We learned that from seeing him and seeing the answers and the communication on the sequence of events.
Brianna was stabbed 28 times (MEN Media)“It is agreed that following his remand into the secure unit, the 15-year-old boy stopped speaking to anybody apart from his mother. We know that he was diagnosed with selective mutism - everyone agrees that his silence is not a matter of choice and his verbal communication challenges are beyond his personal control.
"You saw it with your own eyes. The beginning of his mutism, you might think, started to come in as the interviews progressed as his voice became quieter and quieter before disappearing completely. You might think he comes from a loving family. Hang on, Mr Pratt [Girl X's barrister Richard Pratt KC] says, he likes knives.
"So does Girl X. But Boy Y had one purchased for him by his mum and dad. Compare and contrast Boy Y having a hunting knife purchased by his dad on holiday to Girl X actually trying to poison and kill Brianna. Those two things are in a very different league, aren’t they? The central issue will be whether Boy Y intentionally participated in the killing of Brianna in Culcheth Linear Park. Let's look at whether we think Boy Y actually stabbed anyone.
The attack took place in a Warrington park (Liverpool Echo)"His case is that he did not stab Brianna at all, but he was there in the park. He said that from the outset. If you find Boy Y was the stabber, he’s guilty of murder. Can you rule out the possibility that he didn’t? Then you ask the question, if Girl X was the stabber, can you be sure that Boy Y encouraged or assisted that to happen? His case has always been he didn’t expect her to do that.
“I’ve got a problem, and it’s massive. There should be another count on this indictment, and that count is theft. There has been a theft in this case. Girl X has stolen our defence, and that’s a big problem. Even though Boy Y told the police immediately that Girl X stabbed Brianna while he was close by behind a tree, sadly Girl X has now chosen to invent the same defence. Girl X knows she can vocally articulate that defence to you, confidently, while she watched Boy Y in the dock or in the witness box.
"Mute. Attempting to give evidence via typing his answers. One is unable to speak, the other is ready and willing to confidently tread the boards and lie and lie again with the odd laugh and smirk. I counted 17 laughs during Girl X’s interview when she gave that lying account."
Mr Littler also touched on evidence concerning his client's past participation in kickboxing as a child, as well as Girl X having saved his number in her phone as "Tesco John Wick", reported the Liverpool Echo. He said: "Despite the best efforts of Mr Pratt to paint a picture of a fighting, jabbing kickboxing champion.
"He was 11. Not really the Karate Kid impression Mr Pratt wanted to paint. The prosecution wanted to remind you of Tesco John Wick. He was a hitman. Boy Y, a hitman, Tesco John Wick. More like a Tesco meal deal." Mr Littler concluded his speech by saying: "This is a case where you must ask whether it is possible that this 15-year-old was tricked, controlled and manipulated by Girl X. His defence has always been that he did not expect it to happen.
Russian model killed after calling Putin a 'psychopath' was strangled by her ex
"When he handed the knife over, he did not believe for one moment his was going to be used. Was it possible that Girl X did something he had not expected to happen? He believed she was a fantasist. He went along with her stories because she was helping him with Girl A.
“Yes, he brought the knife, because she asked for it. But he didn’t believe for one moment she was going to use it. Girl X had manipulated the situation which led to her killing. Is it beyond the realms of possibility she was tricking other people? She had tried to kill her before. She tried to turn her fantasy into reality twice.
"She needed Boy Y at the park because she needed his knife. She wouldn’t be stupid enough to use her own. She used Boy Y because he was stupid enough to come along. She needed Boy Y to blame if her other cover stories did not work out.
"Better still, she now flips the defences and uses ours. The truth in this case is Girl X was no friend of Boy Y or Brianna - she was only interested in Girl X That’s why she wrote the play, she directed it, she produced it, she stage managed it. She was always going to be the main character and enjoy the limelight.
“Boy Y was an extra. He did not stab her, he did not intentionally participate in that stabbing." The trial, before Mrs Justice Yip, continues and is expected to last around four weeks in total.
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
