What was MacPhail's mitigation?published at 12:09 Greenwich Mean Time 1 November
When determining the sentence, Mr Justice Hilliard took into account what was said in mitigation for MacPhail, so it's worth looking back at what was said on his behalf.
The teenager's legal team had argued any premeditation or planning was "limited" with his barrister Nigel Edwards KC saying the attack was a "spontaneous eruption" of violence in a "fast-moving" situation.
He said MacPhail became "angry and lashed out" but he had been speaking to Holly for about 15 minutes before he actually attacked her.
Mr Edwards also said MacPhail only intended to cause "bodily harm" rather than kill Holly.
He said the teenager had had an "unconscionable" childhood with years of abuse, which was a "significant" mitigating factor, but it did not excuse his actions.
Mr Edwards said MacPhail described himself as a "monster" who "no-one could love".