‘Deliberate killing’ or self-defence? The final arguments in schoolboy murder trial

The jury in the trial of a boy accused of murder are set to retire on Thursday after the prosecution and defence gave their closing speeches.

The boy, now 16, is accused of murdering 14-year-old Christopher, who was fatally stabbed in Ramsey on May 29 last year.

The defendant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, admits inflicting the fatal wound but claims he acted in self-defence. He denies murder.

READ MORE: The messages, footage and evidence at the heart of schoolboy murder trial

After almost four weeks, all the evidence has been heard and the jury will soon consider its verdict.

In his closing speech, prosecutor David Temkin KC told the jury the attack on Christopher by the defendant was ‘deliberate and frenzied’.

He said: ‘The prosecution says [the defendant] intended to kill Christopher or at least do really serious harm.

‘This is not self-defence, it’s not manslaughter, this is deliberate, unlawful killing.’

Mr Temkin told the jury people with autism and ADHD can still be guilty of murder and that the defendant understood threats made online could lead to real-life harm.

‘No one is suggesting [the defendant] did not know what he was doing at the time,’ Mr Temkin said.

He also suggested the boy could understand sarcasm which was evidence in voice notes which showed him appearing to be sarcastic.

Mr Temkin referred to the arranged fight the year before which the defendant failed to attend and was the teased and bullied over.

The prosecutor suggested the defendant was determined to show ‘he had grown up, was more confident, braver and would do what he said he would do’.

Mr Temkin then referred to the threats to kill the defendant had made in the group chats.

‘[The defendant] became the bully,’ Mr Temkin added.

This was a prearranged fight, Mr Temkin said, and witnesses described the defendant as ‘angry, aggressive and calm’ when he came out of his house that day.

‘Forget self-defence ,’ Mr Temkin added.

The defendant’s version of events was questioned with Mr Temkin raising concerns over his lack of memory of the stabbing itself.

In the stabbing Mr Temkin invited the jury to consider words like ‘over the top’, ‘disproportionate’, ‘unnecessary’, ‘unlawful’ and ‘unreasonable’.

He said the defendant went straight for the chest where the vital organs are.

He also told the jury it was the defendant who kept message over and over and made more threats to kill.

He kept asking Christopher to come to his house, Mr Temkin explained.

‘The chat could have fizzled out,’ Mr Temkin said. ‘Christopher had had enough and it could have ended there but the defendant did not let it go.

‘He was desperate to get Christopher to Ramsey so he could do what he said he would and kill him.’

The defendant was also not honest, Mr Temkin insisted.

‘The defendant said over and over again that he refused to accept they were coming to Ramsey,’ Mr Temkin explained.

‘How can that be when the evidence shows he repeatedly requested they come to Ramsey?

‘The defendant did not tell the truth because he had something to hide.’

Defence advocate Siobhan Grey KC dismissed many of Mr Temkin’s claims.

Ms Grey said: ‘We say [the defendant] did not act unlawfully that day. You cannot convict a boy who that day was doing nothing more than defending himself.’

Ms Grey explained that the defendant felt more comfortable online.

She said: ‘There is a contrast between the online world and the real world.

‘[The defendant] feels more protected online which makes him more vulnerable. He displayed confrontational behaviour he would not display face-to-face.

‘He was isolated and not at school which meant all his engagement was through social media.’

Ms Grey insists her client genuinely never believed anyone would come to Ramsey and that he never wanted a fight despite all the messages. He treated the online insults ‘as a big joke’.

She told the jury they are judging a boy, not an adult, who has autism, ADHD, social anxiety that his mental functioning is that of a ‘much younger child’.

‘These are real conditions with real impairment,’ Ms Grey said.

She also remined the jury of the bus footage which appeared to show Christopher and another boy talking about the fight as they travelled from Castletown to Ramsey, and acting out how they thought it would play out. This included the other boy wrapping a chain round his knuckles.

Ms Grey also explained to the jury that self-defence does not mean you have to come to serious harm first, it could be a ‘pre-emptive strike’.

She also claimed the reason the knife could have gone so far in maybe due to the weight of Christopher.

‘It was a dynamic and fast-moving incident’, she said. ‘Force could have come from Christopher moving forward.

‘This is not black and white. Looking at it from [the defendant’s] perspective, with messages, the amount of people who turned up, that he was attacked first, we don’t know what would have happened to him if he had not acted.’

The deemster is due to deliver his summing up and the jury are expected to retire by Thursday afternoon to consider their verdict.