Jury discharged in Ammanford school stabbing trial (original) (raw)
The jury has been discharged in the trial of a teenager accused of attempting to murder two teachers and a pupil at a school in Wales. The girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, faced three charges of attempted murder after an incident in Ysgol Dyffryn Aman in Ammanford, Carmarthenshire on April 24 this year.
Teachers Fiona Elias and Liz Hopkin, as well as a pupil, were taken to hospital after the incident. Mrs Elias and the injured pupil were taken to Morriston Hospital with injuries and the most seriously injured victim, Miss Hopkin, was flown by air ambulance to the University Hospital of Wales in Cardiff with stab wounds to her leg, a wound to the rear of the left side of the chest, and a stab wound at the top of the neck into the trapezius muscle.
The defendant later pleaded guilty to three counts of grievous bodily harm with intent and one count of possession of a bladed article on school premises but denied the attempted murder charges.
The trial has lasted several days and the jury were sent out for deliberations on Tuesday but on Wednesday morning, October 9 they were discharged by Judge Paul Thomas KC who said it was "profound and very unsatisfactory to discharge the jury, especially for the [defendant] who will have to stand trial again". A retrial will begin on 27 January.
Follow live updates and recap the case so far below:
11:15KEY EVENT
Jury discharged in trial
The jury has been discharged in the trial. Judge Paul Thomas KC discharged the jury on Wednesday morning with a retrial now set to begin on 27 January.
The judge said it was "profound and very unsatisfactory to discharge the jury, especially for the [defendant] who will have to stand trial again".
15:58KEY EVENT
Jury sent home
The jury is returning to court.
Judge Paul Thomas KC sends the jurors home for the day and reminds them not to discuss the case with anyone. The trial will resume at 10am on Wednesday when the jury will resume its deliberations.
13:00KEY EVENT
Jury retires to deliberate
The jury retires to begin considering its verdicts.
Judge Paul Thomas KC tells jurors the first thing they should do is select one form their number to act as what is commonly known as the foreman. He says this is a woman or man who will chair the discussions and will ensure every member of the jury has a chance to express their views.
The judge tells the jury it should strive to reach verdicts on all three counts on which all jurors agree – that is to reach unanimous verdicts. He tells jurors they may have heard of “majority verdicts” but tells them to put such thoughts out of their mind. He says the time for majority verdicts may never arise but if it does he will give them specific directions on it.
Finally the judge tells jurors they are under no pressure of time. Jury bailiffs are sworn in and the jury leaves court to begin its deliberations.
12:32Jason Evans
Case is not 'a soap opera or a television school drama'
Defence barrister Caroline Rees KC, giving her closing speech, tells the jury they are not dealing with “a soap opera or a television school drama” but with a real event “with real people at the heart of it”. She says she knows the jurors will give the case the proper consideration it deserves.
The defence barrister reminds the jurors that it is for the prosecution to prove the case so that they are sure and that nothing less than that will do.
The barrister says a “not guilty” verdict means the jury is not sure the prosecution has proved the case to the necessary standard. She says a “not guilty” verdict “does not mean it is a stamp of approval for what [the defendant] did, it is not a pat on the back. You know she has pleaded guilty. ‘Not guilty’ is not a reflection on the victims who deserve great sympathy for what they have been through.”
The barrister says to the jurors: “Having considered the evidence, and being faithful to the oaths and affirmations you have taken, are you sure that [the defendant] intended to kill the victims in his case?”
That concludes Miss Rees’ closing speech.
12:16Jason Evans
'What did she say? "I did not intend to kill anyone"'
Defence barrister Caroline Rees KC, giving her closing speech, now turns to the comments made to police by the defendant following her arrest. She again asks the jurors to consider what was said in the context of what was happening and in particular the fact that the defendant had seen ambulances, a stretcher, and a helicopter arriving at the school
The barrister says: “We say this is a young girl realising what a terrible, terrible thing she has done and how badly things could have gone wrong." She says “rather than a smile and her enjoying celebrity” the defence say what was happening was an immature young girl “moving through realisation of what she had done”.
Miss Rees says: “That’s not a smile on her face. It’s not gleeful, not self-congratulatory. We say it is the dawning of the realisation of the trouble she is in.”
The defence barrister now turns to the defendant’s live evidence and she asks jurors to consider what it must have been like for a teenage girl to spend a day a day in the witness box of a crown court surrounded by adults who were strangers to her including members of the press.
The barrister reminds jurors the defendant talked about things such as feelings of self-harm and suicide which “must have been horrible things for a young girl to talk about”. She invites the jury to find the defendant did her best to give evidence and where there were things she did not remember she had said so.
Miss Rees says: “We say she gave you proper explanations for everything that happened. What did she say? ‘I did not intend to kill anyone’. We say that is evidence you can accept.”
12:00Jason Evans
'It may be a stretch too far to say she deliberately targeted the neck'
Turning to the attack on Liz Hopkin in her closing speech defence barrister Caroline Rees KC says there is no suggestion any threats were issued to her by the defendant either before or during the incident. She says the prosecution claim the location of the stab wound to the neck is indicative of the defendant’s intention to kill is a “red herring”. The barrister says the defendant was “lashing out” with the knife and “it may be a stretch too far to say she deliberately targeted the neck”.
The defence barrister now turns to the stabbing of the pupil by the defendant. She says only one witness reports hearing the defendant say she wanted to kill the girl and she invites the jury to find that in the noise and chaos of what was happening that witness may have got it wrong. Barrister: “There is doubt about whether those threats about [the victim] were said. If there is doubt [the defendant] is entitled to that doubt”.
11:52Jason Evans
'A phrase issued in temper by a sad immature girl'
Defence barrister Caroline Rees KC says the prosecution claim the fact the defendant took a knife to school on the day in question is consistent with the defendant’s intention to kill but she reminds the jury that they have heard evidence that she routinely carried a blade and Mrs Elias had in fact previously found her in possession of one. She says carrying a knife was the “sad normal” for the girl.
The defence barrister asks the jury to consider that the defendant made no attempt to conceal her identity on the day in question and said she attacked Mrs Elias in a location where there were “lots” of other people who could intervene. Miss Rees says: “If she really wanted to see it though why not do it in a quiet moment when there were no adults around to stop her?”
The barrister sys it was Mrs Elias’ evidence that the defendant had said to her that she was going to kill her though the defendant herself cannot remember saying it. The barrister says: “Just because she said it, did she mean it? Look at the words in the context of everything that happened.”
The barrister describes the defendant as an “angry, out-of-control” teenager and says an girl, or indeed an angry out-of-control adult, may say such words but that does not actually mean they have an intention to kill. The barrister calls it “a phrase issued in temper by a sad immature girl”.
11:44Jason Evans
'Are those words consistent only with an intent to kill?'
Defence barrister Caroline Rees KC says the drawings and words written down by the defendant may be immature, silly, and unkind but they do not amount to an intention to kill. She says the context of those words and drawings show “the contents of a troubled and busy mind” and reminds the jury of the evidence they have heard from the defendant about how she deals with her emotions by committing them to paper. She reminds the jury that the defendant had also written about self-harm and feelings of self-loathing.
The defence barrister urges jurors not to be as “harsh” as the prosecution in considering those drawings and words. She says: “We invite you to reject what the prosecution say that they show an intent to kill” and asks the jurors to see the written material in the context of a “deeply unhappy” teenage girl.
The barrister reminds the jury about the phrase “crime of a lifetime” which the prosecution say shows an intent to kill. She says that phrase could equally apply to assaulting a teacher, which is something the defendant has already admitted. She says: “Are those words consistent only with an intent to kill? Or are they equally consistent with what she did?”
11:26Jason Evans
'She has done terrible things and takes full responsibility for them by her pleas'
Caroline Rees KC, for the defence, now addresses the jury.
The barrister begins by telling jurors they may feel shock and horror at what happened in Ysgol Dyffryn Aman on the day in question and disbelief that a 13-year-old could take a knife to school and use it. She tells them it’s normal to feel such emotions but tells them they must put those emotions to one side and consider the case “with their heads and not their hearts” and decide it on the facts.
The barrister says while the court has spent many hours poring over the events of April 29 the incident was a “very frantic, very quick, and very heated” one which lasted just three minutes.
She says the defendant has accepted by her pleas to wounding with intent her guilt for what she did on the day and has not sought to claim what she did was in any way right or justified.
Ms Rees says: “[The defendant] was a troubled and unhappy child... She has done terrible things and takes full responsibility for them by her pleas.”
11:12Jason Evans
'Ferocious attack'
Prosecution barrister William Hughes KC, describing the incident in his closing speech, says when teacher Liz Hopkin intervenes to protect her colleague she “feels the full force of [the] ferocious attack”. He says the defendant delivered a number of blows with the weapon “with purpose” and that purpose was to kill. He says the defendant deliberately targeted Miss Hopkin’s neck and had the blow been a few centimetres either side the wound could have been fatal.
Mr Hughes says the defendant then turned on a pupil and repeatedly stabbed her. He says it was only the intervention of members of staff that prevented her from carrying out her intent to kill the pupil.
The prosecution barrister now reminds the jury about the comments made by the defendant to police officers following her arrest about whether the people she stabbed were dead and about being a celebrity and he reminds the jury about the little “smile” which came across her face. The barrister says the smile was in opposition to the “stony face” she had during the incident itself.
Mr Hughes says it is the prosecution case that the defendant intended to kill her victims with the bladed article she took to school that day. That concludes the prosecution's closing speech.
10:53Jason Evans
'The attack was committed with the intent to kill her, to commit "the crime of a lifetime"'
Prosecutor William Hughes KC, giving his closing speech, reminds the jury the defendant had previously been found with a knife at school and that, as a result, her dad would check her bag every morning. He says it is the prosecution case that on the morning of the incident the defendant deliberately left the family home early to avoid the multi-tool weapon being found.
He then reminds the jury about comments made by the defendant at school on the morning of April 29 about wanting to stab Mrs Elias.
Mr Hughes says it is the prosecution case that the defendant went looking for Mrs Elias and after the pair had talked for around two minutes had “lunged” at the teacher with the knife. He says the blades of the multi-tool were already open and there was no “fiddling about” with the weapon in the pocket. He says she had got the knife “prepared and ready to use”.
The barrister says the defendant delivered a number a forceful blows to Mrs Elias and says the purpose of the assault was to kill the teacher. He says: “The attack was committed with the intent to kill her, to commit ‘the crime of a lifetime’”.
10:40Jason Evans
Prosecutor begins his closing speech
Croeso/welcome to our continuing coverage of the trial. The morning session will begin with William Hughes KC for the prosecution addressing the jury in his closing speech.
Mr Hughes begins by reminding the jurors that it is for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the defendant and that she does not have to prove anything. He says it is the job of the prosecution to make them sure.
He reminds the jury that the defendant has accepted three counts of inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent but denies attempted murde, and that the issue for the court is the defendant’s intent when she carried out the attacks.
The barrister reminds the jury about the drawings and comments found in the defendant’s notebooks following the stabbing including comments about committing the “crime of a lifetime”, wanting to so “something humans are not supposed to do”, and: “Why do I want to kill others as much as I want to kill myself?"
The barrister says “it is not uncommon for teens to think negatively and darkly and perhaps write about it but what is unusual is for them to carry out their musings”.
The prosecution asks the jury to consider whether the “musings” written by the defendant were intended, as the defendant maintains, only to be read by her or whether they were intended to be found and read by others after she had carried out that which she had written about.
15:50Philip Dewey
Trial adjourns for the day
Judge Paul Thomas KC adjourns the case for the day. He tells the jury both prosecutor William Hughes KC and defence barrister Caroline Rees KC will deliver their closing speeches.
He said the jury will likely retire tomorrow to consider their verdict.
The trial adjourns until 10am tomorrow.
15:17Philip Dewey
Defendant 'can't remember' if she intended Miss Hokpin to die while stabbing her
Addressing the defendant, Judge Thomas said: “What do you think would happen if someone is stabbed in the neck?”
The defendant said: “Obviously they can pass away if it’s in a certain part of the neck.”
Judge Thomas said: “And you knew that.”
The defendant said: “Yes.”
In reexamination, Ms Rees said: “Did you deliberately target Miss Hopkin’s neck?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you have any intention of causing her to die?”
The defendant said: “I can’t remember.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you find any of this funny?”
The defendant said: “No… At that point I had no idea of what happened, I had no idea of attacking anybody. I remember crying when I had been in restraint by Mr Campbell.”
When asked how she felt in the back of the police car, the defendant said: “I was shook, scared, concerned and guilty.”
The defendant has now finished her evidence and the trial adjourns for a short break.
15:01Philip Dewey
Defendant says she smiled as 'some sort of joke'
Footage is played of the defendant in the back of a police car.
Mr Hughes said: “Did you ask the officers are they going to die because you thought you’d kill the three people you’d stabbed?”
The defendant said: “I saw a person being carried on a stretcher into a police helicopter and that’s when I started to worry because I couldn’t remember what happened and it was a shock.”
On the footage, the defendant was heard to say: “I’ve had loads of eyes on me today, sooner or later I’m 90% sure this is going to be on the news and that’s one way to be a celebrity.”
Mr Hughes said: “Were you pleased of getting media attention for what you’d done?”
The defendant said: “No, I was trying to lighten the mood.”
Judge Paul Thomas KC said: “Making light of it?”
The defendant said: “Yes, that’s something I do when I’m upset.”
Referring to the footage, Mr Hughes said: “You smiled, is that something that made you happy?”
The defendant said: “No, it was meant to be some sort of joke.”
14:58Philip Dewey
Defendant 'doesn't remember' being restrained
Mr Hughes said: “You wanted to kill (the female pupil).”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “You only stopped because Mr Campbell restrained you but you were trying to get away and go towards (the female pupil) and attack her.”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember being restrained.”
Mr Hughes said: “It was only when Mr Duberage asked you for the knife did you hand it over. Why didn’t you hand the knife over?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Are you saying that to avoid detailed questions about that incident?”
The defendant said: “No, I genuinely can’t remember.”
14:57Philip Dewey
More footage played to defendant
Further footage is played of the defendant being confronted by Mr Hagget and Mr Campbell.
Mr Hughes said: “Did you say to Mr Hagget and Mr Campbell ‘If I see Mrs Elias I’m going to kill her’?”
The defendant said: “I can’t remember.”
Footage is played of the moment the female pupil was stabbed.
Mr Hughes said: “You ran at (the female pupil) in order to attack her didn’t you?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did you shout (the female pupil) I’m going to f****** kill you’?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember… I remember I said ‘(female pupil) you’re next’.”
14:46Philip Dewey
Defendant answers 'I can't remember' to questions regarding Miss Hopkin's stabbing
Footage of the moment the defendant stabbed Miss Hopkin is replayed to the court.
Mr Hughes said: “You stabbed Miss Hopkin a number of times.”
The defendant said: “Yes.”
Mr Hughes said: “The multitool fell to the floor, you picked it up and stabbed her.”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “You stabbed her to her neck and back.”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Were you angry Miss Hopkin stopped you from killing Elias?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Is that why you wanted to kill Miss Hopkin?”
The defendant said: “I can’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “At that point you wanted to kill Miss Hopkin.”
The defendant said: “I can’t remember.”
14:44Philip Dewey
Trial resumes after lunch
The trial resumes.
Prosecutor William Hughes KC continues his cross examination of the defendant.
He refers to the moment Mrs Elias was stabbed.
Mr Hughes said: “You stabbed her at least three times.”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember but I think so.”
Mr Hughes said: “You tried to stab her more, seven times.”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did Miss Hopkin stop you from killing Mrs Elias?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Is that why you started stabbing Miss Hopkin? Because you wanted to kill Mrs Elias didn’t you?”
The defendant said: “No.”
12:50Philip Dewey
Defendant denies saying 'I’m going to kill you, I’m going to f****** kill you’
The defendant was asked why she ran towards Mrs Elias.
She said she can’t remember.
CCTV footage of the defendant stabbing Mrs Elias is played to the court.
Mr Hughes said: “Before you lunged at Mrs Elias, you had been standing very still and staring straight at her.”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Were you trying to intimidate her?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did she ask what was in your pocket?”
The defendant said: “Yes.”
Mr Hughes said: “Is that when you pulled the blade out?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “As you pulled the blade out, did you say ‘I’m going to kill you, I’m going to f****** kill you’?”
The defendant said: “No.”
The trial adjourns for lunch and will resume at 2.20pm.
12:40Philip Dewey
Girl said she wanted to slap Mrs Elias
Further footage is shown of the defendant speaking to Mrs Elias.
Mr Hughes said: “You were angry at this time, did you want to hit her?”
The defendant: “No.”
Mr Hughes said: “Why don’t you leave the scene then?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember too much of that conversation we had… I didn’t want to (leave the scene) I guess.”
She was asked why she was following Mrs Elias, and said: “I don’t know.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did you want to follow Mrs Elias because you wanted to stab her with that weapon in your pocket and kill her?”
The defendant said: “No.”
She admitted she later had the intention of slapping Mrs Elias.
12:35Philip Dewey
Footage of Mrs Elias speaking to defendant in the lower school hall replayed to court
The court is replayed footage of Mrs Elias speaking to the defendant in the lower school hall, when she was told she wasn’t allowed in there.
Mr Hughes said: “How did that make you feel?”
The defendant said: “Angry.”
Mr Hughes said: “Why?”
The defendant said: “Because I was being told I couldn’t go in the lower school hall.”
Mr Hughes said: “You had already been told you couldn’t go in there so why did that make you angry?”
The defendant said: “At the time, I didn’t like the answer no because I had woken up in a bad mood.”
The defendant is asked about comments she made to other pupils.
Mr Hughes said: “Did you tell them I’m going to be put away for a long time?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did you tell them I’m going to stab someone or stab Mrs Elias?”
The defendant said: “I don’t remember… I didn’t have any intent to do anything.”
12:27Philip Dewey
Defendant took knives to school as she 'didn't trust the system or people'
The defendant was asked why she took a knife to school every day.
She said: “Because I felt worried and scared in school.”
Mr Hughes said: “You were told not to take any blades or knives in as part of your conditions on returning back to school. Why did you continue to take knives in?”
The defendant said: “I didn’t trust the system or people.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did you take that knife into school to use it against Mrs Elias?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did you take that knife to use it against (the female pupil)?”
The defendant said: “No.”
12:26Philip Dewey
Defendant wrote about 'committing the crime of a lifetime' in notebook
The trial resumes.
Prosecutor William Hughes KC begins his cross examination of the defendant.
The defendant is asked about entries in a notebook, in reference to “committing the crime of a lifetime.”
Mr Hughes said: “Did you want to become famous… Did you have murder in your mind?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Mr Hughes said: “You didn’t like Mrs Elias did you?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Mr Hughes said: “Do you hate her?”
The defendant said: “Yeah.”
She was asked about conversations she had with other pupils about hurting Mrs Elias.
Mr Hughes said: “When you said about hurting, you meant cause really serious harm.”
The defendant said: “Yes.”
Mr Hughes said: “You wanted to kill her.”
The defendant said: “No.”
12:04Philip Dewey
'It doesn't feel like I did it to be honest'
Ms Rees said: “Did you see ambulances arrive?”
The defendant said: “I tried to but they shut the door, I saw them push someone into a helicopter and my stomach dropped…
“I didn’t mean to say oopsies as people may have represented it, it was more like ‘I f***** up’.”
Ms Rees said: “How did you feel about the fact you had stabbed (the female pupil)?”
The defendant said: “Terrible… Like I asked if they were dead because I saw someone being pushed them into a helicopter and I thought I’d done…
Ms Rees said: “Did you want them to be dead?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “How do you feel about what you did?”
The defendant said: “It doesn’t feel like I did it to be honest.”
Ms Rees said: “How does it make you feel to know you did?”
The defendant said: “Terrible, guilty.”
Ms Rees said: “Do you regret the way you behaved that day?”
The defendant said: “Yes.”
Ms Rees said: “Do you feel sorry?”
The defendant said: “Yes, I’d do anything to go back.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you attempt to murder the three victims in this case? Did you want any of them dead?”
The defendant said: “No.”
The trial adjourns for a short break.
12:02Philip Dewey
Defendant felt 'guilty' and 'sick' after incident
The defendant is asked about the aftermath of the incident.
Ms Rees said: “Can you remember much about what happened on the CCTV?”
“No, I remembered being pulled to a wall, her screaming ‘You’re a f****** psychopath’ and me saying ‘It’s your fault’.
Ms Rees said: “Do you remember teachers taking you away?”
The defendant said: “I remember getting pushed to admin.”
Ms Rees said: “How did you feel by then?”
The defendant said: “Nothing to be honest… Empty and relieved.”
Ms Rees said: “Why were you relieved?”
The defendant said: “I felt like I didn’t have anything on my mind anymore.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you realise what you’d done?”
The defendant said: “At that point no but I remember my stomach hurting a lot… I felt sick.”
Ms Rees said: “Had you got the idea you had seriously injured three people?”
The defendant said: “I kind of got the idea when the police came in.”
Ms Rees said: “When did it hit you what you’d done?”
The defendant said: “When I was in the back of the police van.”
Ms Rees said: “What did (being arrested) feel like?”
The defendant said: “I didn’t care.”
Ms Rees said: “Were you feeling anything?”
The defendant said: “No.”
The defendant was asked how she felt in the police van.
She said: “Guilty.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you realise what you had done then?”
“Yes.”
12:01Philip Dewey
Defendant asked about incident involving female pupil
The defendant was asked about the incident involving the female pupil.
She said: “I ran over to a friend in the hopes they would calm me down… She has this ability to calm me down because that’s the effect people I trust can have on me…
“(I) Remember her saying ‘Think of your family’... I tried to breathe slowly but it didn’t work.”
Ms Rees said: “We know you attacked (a female pupil).”
The defendant said: “I remember hearing somebody speaking, I recognised the voice. I turned around and screamed ‘(pupil’s name) you’re next’.”
Judge Thomas KC said: “You’re next’ for what?”
The defendant said: “I don’t know… I don’t recall hearing, seeing, feeling anything after that.”
She denied calling the female pupil a “b*tch” or of threatening to kill her
Ms Rees said: “Did you want to kill (the female pupil)?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Can you remember striking her?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Would you have wanted her to be dead?”
The defendant said: “No.”
11:57Philip Dewey
Girl was 'shook and shaking' after lashing out at teachers with knife
The defendant was asked what she remembered at the time of the incident.
She said: “I remember seeing black and remember my body swinging.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you feel in control of yourself?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you deliberately target Miss Hopkin’s neck?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you deliberately target any part of the body of those two teachers?”
The defendant said: “No.”
She was again asked how she felt. She said: “I remember feeling very exhausted, but quite scared and panicked… I don’t remember feeling anything but I was a bit shook and I was shaking. I didn’t notice until I looked at my hands.”
The defendant said she could “barely remember” the two male teachers becoming involved.
11:55Philip Dewey
'It's just dark' says defendant when asked to recall moment she stabbed victims
The defendant is asked about the incident itself.
Ms Rees said: “Do you remember why it was you pulled the multitool out?”
The defendant said: “Not really no, I don’t remember.”
Ms Rees said: “You striked out at Mrs Elias and then Miss Hopkin who got in between you… Why did you do that?”
The defendant said: “I’m unaware, I don’t remember I’m afraid.”
Ms Rees said: “We know you hit her with a knife, when you did that did you intend to kill her?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Have you ever throughout this wanted to see her dead?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Can you remember what you were saying?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “It’s unchallenged evidence you said I’m going to kill you, do you remember that?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you at any point want to kill any of the people involved here?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “You have already pleaded guilty to wounding with intent to do them really serious injury, and accepted that in respect of all three individuals in this case.”
The defendant said: “Yes.”
Ms Rees said: “Do you remember Miss Hopkin getting involved, getting in between you and breaking it up?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “What does your mind feel like?”
The defendant said: “I remember thinking to myself, what are you doing, stop. But I don’t remember seeing anything…
“It’s just dark, to say the least. I remember being very hot during the incident.”
11:39Philip Dewey
Defendant asked about start of the incident
The defendant is asked about the beginning of the incident.
Ms Rees said: “Why did you approach them?”
The defendant said: “I was initially at that point assuming I was going to hit Mrs Elias.”
Ms Rees said: “With what?”
The defendant said: “My hands.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you have any intention of assaulting the other teacher?”
The defendant said: “No.”
Ms Rees said: “Did you speak to them?”
The defendant said: “I spoke to Mrs Fiona Elias but not Liz.”
Ms Rees said: “What did you say?
The defendant said: “I started the conversation asking why I couldn’t go in the lower school hall and she brought up my uniform.”
When asked if she remembered the incident, she said: “I remember the start but the rest of it was a blur.”