Jack Woodley case: Killer acted rashly but not with intent, court told

Jack Woodley was repeatedly punched, kicked and stamped upon before being stabbed

A 15-year-old boy who fatally stabbed a teenager during a gang attack acted rashly and recklessly but not murderously, his lawyers have said.

Jack Woodley, 18, died from a single stab wound after being attacked in Houghton-le-Spring in October.

A 15-year-old boy admits manslaughter but denies murder. Nine others, all aged 14 to 18, deny both charges.

The killer's lawyer told Newcastle Crown Court the boy accepted he was to blame but did not intend it.

In their closing arguments, the prosecution said the 10 youths had acted like a team in the "ferocious" attack on Mr Woodley, which included punches, kicks and stamps to his head as well as the knife wound.

The confessed knifeman's lawyer Nicholas Lumley QC said it would take a "hard heart not to be moved by the loss of life of a son, grandson and friend taken far, far too young".

But he urged the jury to put emotion aside and focus "calmly" on the facts.

Jack Woodley died in hospital a day after being attacked near the Britannia Inn in Houghton-le-Spring

Mr Lumley also urged the jury to consider what had happened in the "quick chaos" of "real time" rather than slowed down footage of "frame-by-frame" analysis caught on CCTV and mobile phone footage.

"The reality in real time is that however many times you watch it, what happened in real time was rash and reckless certainly, but nothing more than that," Mr Lumley said, adding: "Mindless violence? Yes. Murder? We say no."

He said the actual moment the fatal blow was struck was not caught on camera and the prosecution had sought to "fill those gaps simply by assuming the very worst", but, Mr Lumley added, assumptions "have no place in a criminal trial".

The boy claimed he had got the 25cm-long knife out to scare people and it cut into Mr Woodley "accidentally".

Mr Lumley said the prosecution called his claim "ludicrous" and "ridiculed him" when actually the use of the word "accidental" was the 15-year-old's "inelegant" way of trying to explain that he had not intended to stab Mr Woodley.

He said the knife had caused a 7cm deep wound which, though it proved fatal, showed the boy had not actually meant to stab Mr Woodley.

"Why was that hideous knife only used for a tiny proportion of its lethal length?" Mr Lumley said, adding: "Not only is it a possibility [the boy] did not have murderous intent but it complies with the evidence."

One of the 10 defendants admits stabbing Jack Woodley with a 9in (25cm) knife

He said to call the wound "deep" would be "just wrong" and "unfair", adding: "We don't belittle the actual effect of what the knife did because it turns out it was fatal, but we doubt many of us in this room would have expected a single knife wound of such modest depth could have such a catastrophic effect."

Mr Lumley said the boy had lied to the police about his involvement and "not made it easy" for jurors to believe him, but he urged them to remember his young age, adding: "Of course [lying] is grotesquely selfish on many levels but it's understandable if you allow a 15-year-old some latitude."

He also said had the boy intended to cause really serious harm, he could not have chosen a worse spot than in the middle of a town covered by CCTV, next to a busy pub full of witnesses.

Prosecutors said the boy had "bragged" about owning the knife, which he had bought for £25 six months before, and claimed he had previously stabbed people with it.

'Rest of life knowing'

Mr Lumley said the boy had "undoubtedly" shown off to new friends when he moved to the region five weeks before as he was "running with older kids" and "perhaps tried to talk the talk, grow some feeble hair on his top lip and show off to his new mates", but he was "talking rubbish" and people were "telling stories" about the "new kid in town".

He said: "The showing off [the boy] undoubtedly did would be pathetic if the consequences had not been so serious."

He also said the boy had no motive to actually want to harm Mr Woodley, who he did not know, adding: "He did not pretend for one moment Jack had done anything to him that required this level of violence.

"[The boy] has been accused rightly of telling lies but it would have been quite an easy lie to tell to somehow seek to put blame on the person who was killed. He did no such thing".

Mr Lumley said the boy would "live for the rest of his life knowing that Jack is dead and it is his fault", but he should not be labelled a murderer as he had not intended for it to happen.

'Serious flaws'

David Lamb QC, representing a 16-year-old boy who ran up and punched Mr Woodley from behind triggering the attack, said his client had only ever intended to have a "one on one" fist fight with the victim.

He said the boy had no knowledge there was knife, did not think anybody would join in and did not encourage anyone to do so.

Mr Lamb said there was "no planned attack" and "this was no team effort", questioning when the group had actually had any discussion about it.

He said the melee his client accepted starting was "fast moving, confusing and unpredictable" involving a large number of boys and girls, many of whom were "dressed almost identically" and only a few of whom "find themselves in the dock".

Mr Lamb said there were conflicting witness accounts of who did what, adding the "serious flaws" and "cracks" in the prosecution cases were "as wide as the ocean".

The trial, which began a month-and-a-half ago, continues.