Brianna Ghey Murder Trial #3

[Tofino]

Sentencing Act 2020

An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to sentencing.

www.legislation.gov.uk

I found the legislation for sentencing minors for serious crimes.

In brief, they look at what the sentence would be if they were an adult then adjust based on age at the time the crime was committed.

So for a 15 year old the minimum starting point options would be

- 20 years if it would usually warrant a whole life order
- 17 years if starting point is usually 25 years
- 10 years if the starting point is usually 15 years


To get a whole life order (or starting point of 20 years for a 15 year old) the criteria I think is relevant to this case is:

b)the murder of a child if involving the abduction of the child or sexual or sadistic motivation,

[F1(ba)the murder of a child involving a substantial degree of premeditation or planning, where the offence was committed on or after the day on which section 125 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 came into force,]

This is just starting point so aggravating factors / mitigation may add or reduce to the minimum life term.

I attach pic of aggravating and mitigating factors from legislation. I think Brianna’s mental health vulnerability will be considered an aggravating factor.

I can’t see any relevant mitigating factors apart from age but that would already be taken into account with the starting point.

 

[hooplifehero]

This part of Boy Y's interview really made me think he knows what he's doing when it comes to fighting. He tried to play it down but at the same time I think he's such a pedant that he can't resist showing off his knowledge. Of the two accused, honestly... who would you think could stab 28 times in a short period, with blows entering several centimetres into the body through layers of clothing, and damaging the bone?


RP: “As a child did you learn kickboxing?”

Y: “Yes.”

RP: “Did you become very good at it?”
Y: “I would say I’m average.”

RP: “Were you very good at kickboxing?”

Y: “I cannot assess myself on a sport, that would be my biased opinion.”

RP: “In kickboxing, do you kick and punch your opponent?”

Y: “Yes.”

RP: “Is there a type of punch called a jab?”

Y: “Yes.”
RP: “Can you describe what a jab is for me?”
Y: “A fast left punch.”

RP: “Can you also jab with a right hand?”

Y: “No, that would be a straight.”

RP: “Is a straight a fast punch?”
Y: “It is not as fast as a jab but it is more powerful. So it is used after a jab, usually.”

RP: “Do you use your right hand to use a straight?”
Y: “Yes.”

RP: “Are you right handed?”

Y: “Yes.”

RP: “In kickboxing, do you want to punch hard to defeat your opponent?”
Y: “The aim is to get points by landing successful hits. You don’t have to knock them out.”

RP: “What is a successful hit?”

Y: “A hit that lands without being blocked or parried.”

 

[Whataday21]

If Boy Y was responsible for all the physical violence, though, while Girl X was out of sight up a path - as seems possible - why would she make up elaborate lies about a lad from Manchester, and text Boy Y inane stuff about cats purring lol, and feed him a cover story, and maintain her lie even when interviewed by police under arrest?

She thought her texts would make her look bad, but surely if he was the only one who stabbed Brianna, and she was a distance away, and he was covered in blood with his hand on a hunting knife, she could be pretty secure in blaming him?

My guess is she tried to save the both of them with her alibi so they could fool the police and carry on their killing. Once they'd done it once, I think they would have made their way down the list. But of course, she needed him to complete the rest of the list with.

 

[hooplifehero]

My guess is she tried to save the both of them with her alibi so they could fool the police and carry on their killing. Once they'd done it once, I think they would have made their way down the list. But of course, she needed him to complete the rest of the list with.

That seems way more generous than I’d imagine her to be - saving him initially when she could have legitimately put all the blame on him, as she later did?

It’s such a ridiculous alibi too, when Mrs Vyze (?) had seen them standing over the body. Maybe it really is the case that she was deluding herself and halfway into a fantasy world, believing her own stories.

 

[Whataday21]

That seems way more generous than I’d imagine her to be - saving him initially when she could have legitimately put all the blame on him, as she later did?

It’s such a ridiculous alibi too, when Mrs Vyze (?) had seen them standing over the body. Maybe it really is the case that she was deluding herself and halfway into a fantasy world, believing her own stories.

She changed her story later on because she had no choice. Only two people were there so she either takes the blame or passes the blame. But since she had fantasies of killing two people beforehand, it's clear her desire was to kill multiple people.

 

[Narcissus]

If anyone has seen the kickboxing Facebook page that is quite clearly owned by Y’s family member, there are photos on there of a teenage boy who looks VERY similar to the school photo of Boy Y…….

It is an older photo as his hair short now…

 

[CoopsLoops]

I agree with some other posters that Brianna being transgender is relevant. Doesn’t make it a hate crime, but I don’t get how anyone can’t understand that Boy Y’s transphobic comments and attitude is a factor. I do think it’ll be raised as an aggravating factor.

Here’s an argument that I bet you the prosecution counsel has thought about, even if they didn’t make it at this stage:

All the 6 children on the ‘kill list’ including Brianna were male. I suspect it’s possible that Boy Y wouldn’t consider murdering someone he genuinely regarded as female out of a warped sense of honour. Everyone has a moral code, even if it’s twisted, and it’s possible Boy Y would never attack girls.

 

[duckdinner]

If Boy Y was responsible for all the physical violence, though, while Girl X was out of sight up a path - as seems possible - why would she make up elaborate lies about a lad from Manchester, and text Boy Y inane stuff about cats purring lol, and feed him a cover story, and maintain her lie even when interviewed by police under arrest?

She thought her texts would make her look bad, but surely if he was the only one who stabbed Brianna, and she was a distance away, and he was covered in blood with his hand on a hunting knife, she could be pretty secure in blaming him?

She might have thought Y was more loyal than he ended up being. She told him the plan for what to tell the police and since he seemingly had gone along with her plan up to that point, she would have had no reason to suspect him of immediately throwing her under the bus like he did

 

[Sir Lancelot]

I hope they don't somehow decide Girl X is not guilty and had only been acting her 'fantasy'.
She planned it. Encouraged him. Wanted to stab Brianna in the stomach and there was a stomach wound. Led the escape when they were disturbed. Discussed it after. Told him to make sure their stories added up. Had some confusion about the clothes she was wearing. Posted an RIP message knowing Brianna was dead.

They HAVE to both be found guilty.
It is up to the judge to decide on sentencing and they may get different tariffs, but they have to be both found guilty.


I can see appeal after appeal being lodged and this won't end with the judgement. It'll go on for years.

 

[Whataday21]

I hope they don't somehow decide Girl X is not guilty and had only been acting her 'fantasy'.
She planned it. Encouraged him. Wanted to stab Brianna in the stomach and there was a stomach wound. Led the escape when they were disturbed. Discussed it after. Told him to make sure their stories added up. Had some confusion about the clothes she was wearing. Posted an RIP message knowing Brianna was dead.

They HAVE to both be found guilty.
It is up to the judge to decide on sentencing and they may get different tariffs, but they have to be both found guilty.


I can see appeal after appeal being lodged and this won't end with the judgement. It'll go on for years.

I think they have to return the same verdict under joint enterprise, it's not possible to find one guilty and one not but I do believe the sentencing can be different- if it is different, I doubt it will be much different since it was a plan they jointly took part in.

 

[Shinythings]

I think they have to return the same verdict under joint enterprise, it's not possible to find one guilty and one not but I do believe the sentencing can be different- if it is different, I doubt it will be much different since it was a plan they jointly took part in.

The judge said they could find both, none of one guilty unless I've misunderstood.

 

[Whataday21]

The judge said they could find both, none of one guilty unless I've misunderstood.

Yup she does say that, its confusing because surely under joint enterprise if one is found guilty then the other one is too? I really thought joint enterprise meant a joint plan/joint conviction.

 

[CoopsLoops]

Joint enterprise doesn’t mean they have to either jointly be found guilty or not guilty. It means (in this case) that someone can be held responsible for murder even if they didn’t actually physically kill the victim. Provided they meet certain criteria.

That (joint enterprise) is imo relevant much more to Girl X than Boy Y, as there’s strong forensic evidence that Boy Y stabbed Brianna and there isn’t any strong evidence that Girl X did.

Imo they both should be found guilty, and I think that’s the likeliest outcome.

But I think what will give the jury the biggest pause is whether Girl X was fully in fantasy land like she was with all her other lies and didn’t think Boy Y would act on it. And it should give them pause given the severity of the charge.

 

[Whataday21]

Joint enterprise doesn’t mean they have to either jointly be found guilty or not guilty. It means (in this case) that someone can be held responsible for murder even if they didn’t actually physically kill the victim. Provided they meet certain criteria.

That (joint enterprise) is imo relevant much more to Girl X than Boy Y, as there’s strong forensic evidence that Boy Y stabbed Brianna and there isn’t any strong evidence that Girl X did.

Imo they both should be found guilty, and I think that’s the likeliest outcome.

But I think what will give the jury the biggest pause is whether Girl X was fully in fantasy land like she was with all her other lies and didn’t think Boy Y would act on it. And it should give them pause given the severity of the charge.

I believe one of those criteria is aiding and abetting. Since she facilitated the meet between Y and Brianna, I guess the judge has to say it for the sake of saying it but it's clear as day.

 

[nothinonyou]

There is a video on instagram. Big lad

I think we've seen the same video, I don't think he's the big lad, he's the one with longer hair

 

[repairshoplover]

Thinking back to Boy E I think it was who blocked the fake Instagram account. They wanted to stab him but also hang him to make it look like he’d taken his own life. I suspect they thought similar of Brianna because of her poor mental health and self harming. They are both as guilty as each other in my mind.

 

[Shinythings]

Joint enterprise doesn’t mean they have to either jointly be found guilty or not guilty. It means (in this case) that someone can be held responsible for murder even if they didn’t actually physically kill the victim. Provided they meet certain criteria.

That (joint enterprise) is imo relevant much more to Girl X than Boy Y, as there’s strong forensic evidence that Boy Y stabbed Brianna and there isn’t any strong evidence that Girl X did.

Imo they both should be found guilty, and I think that’s the likeliest outcome.

But I think what will give the jury the biggest pause is whether Girl X was fully in fantasy land like she was with all her other lies and didn’t think Boy Y would act on it. And it should give them pause given the severity of the charge.

Absolutely but for me there are too many actions where she shows intent and is taking fantasy into action. I think she could have gotten away with the fantasy thing if she hadn't taken actions that suggested she wanted to make it a reality.

 

[HotesTilaire]

X said she wanted to stab B in the stomach, and she was stabbed near her stomach. X said she wanted to kill B and she watched her being stabbed to death. If X wants us to believe she was just an “unsuspecting” honeytrap fantasist, that’s fine but she’s still guilty. I don’t believe her. I think she pulled some stunt with her clothes.

 

[CoopsLoops]

I believe one of those criteria is aiding and abetting. Since she facilitated the meet between Y and Brianna, I guess the judge has to say it for the sake of saying it but it's clear as day.

The criteria is officially defined as “assisting or encouraging”.

I think Girl X meets the criteria but I don’t think it’s clear as day from her arranging the meet, there needs to be more than that, which imo there is. Joint enterprise is historically problematic (although the interpretation of it has legally been changed/defined).

If both are found guilty, there may be discussion in sentencing as to whether both were “principals” - did the physical act of killing - or there was only one principal and the other had secondary liability.

I agree @Shinythings that there’s evidence Girl X was making her fantasy real with regard to Brianna. That’s why I said I think she’ll be found guilty.
---

 

[Allmyownopinion]

It is an older photo as his hair short now…

Mad how his family are just cracking on like nothing has happened, frequent happy posts throughout the arrest & trial……….