Boy who killed fellow pupil tells jury he thought victim was going to stab him
The teenage defendant told Sheffield Crown Court he felt regret and 'sorry' for Harvey Willgoose's family after he fatally wounded him in the courtyard at All Saints Catholic High School in the city on February 3.
Giving evidence for a fourth day, the 15-year-old said he had not wanted any trouble with Harvey that day and did not want to fight him.
After watching CCTV of the fatal blow, the boy, who cannot be identified by the media, said Harvey looked 'angry, as if he was going to do something' when he walked up to the defendant.
He told Gul Hawaz Hussain KC, defending, that Harvey had one hand out and 'one hand a bit in his trousers' which made him think the schoolboy had a knife.
The youth, who had brought a knife into school that day, told the jury Harvey looked angry when he brought up a previous dispute they had had, and explained how Harvey had touched him on the shoulder.
The defendant said this made him feel 10/10 on a scale of being scared and he told the court that he said to Harvey: 'My bad, just shake my hand.'
He said: 'If I said sorry and he shook my hand, I don't think anything would have happened.'
The defendant said Harvey angrily replied: 'No, f*** off.'
Mr Hussain asked: 'When Harvey grabbed your shoulder, did he say anything?'
The boy said Harvey then told him: 'I will do you in and do you in proper this time.'
He told the court: 'I thought I would have got stabbed by Harvey.'
The boy said he then pulled out his knife, telling the jury: 'I was out of control in myself.'
The defendant, who admits manslaughter but denies murder, said he could not remember stabbing Harvey.
Asked how he felt when he realised he had stabbed the other boy, the defendant said: 'It made me feel upset, scared and shocked.'
Asked how he felt now, knowing Harvey had died because of what he did, the teenager said: 'I feel bad and regret.'
And about how Harvey's family had been affected, the boy said: 'I feel sorry.'
Richard Thyne KC, prosecuting, asked the boy what he had meant to do when he stabbed Harvey.
The defendant said: 'I was not thinking, I was not in control of myself so I didn't really think of anything.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Thousands of websites blocked for UK users from July 25 under new law
Thousands of websites will be blocked for Uk users from Friday, January 25 thanks to a new law. The Online Safety Act, coming into force on July 25, 2025, will fundamentally change how some websites operate in the UK. The new law requires all sites hosting or distributing adult content to implement robust age verification systems or face serious consequences, including being blocked from UK users or fined up to £18 million or 10% of global revenue. Sites that fail to verify a user's age using proper technology – such as ID checks or third-party verification services – will be considered non-compliant. 'The days of ticking a box to say you're over 18 are over,' said Adam Jones, Internet Law Specialist at HD Claims 'Any adult site operating in the UK must now take meaningful steps to prevent underage access, or risk being banned entirely.' READ MORE: Flight attendant explains seat she always books when flying as a plane passenger READ MORE: NASA shares July 28 update as asteroid heading towards Earth's direction 'fast' This applies not just to traditional porn sites, but also to platforms that host user-generated explicit content such as Reddit, X, and OnlyFans. Under the Act, Ofcom now has the power to: Issue content takedown orders and demand access restrictions Fine platforms that fail to prevent underage access Hold UK-based users and distributors accountable for uploads that breach the law Even sites hosted overseas can be blocked if they are accessible in the UK and fail to comply. Adam said: 'While sites must verify age, they are not permitted to retain sensitive personal data without clear user consent. The law includes privacy protections, and any platform storing unnecessary data risks breaching GDPR.' Users can expect to see an increase in secure, privacy-first age verification tools such as digital wallets, credit checks, or government ID-based systems. Companies that don't meet Ofcom's standards could face significant penalties (up to £18 million or 10% of global turnover), whichever is higher. In the most serious cases, senior managers or executives could be held personally responsible. Senior Commercial Technology and Data Protection Solicitor at law firm Harper James, David Sant, said: 'This is just the latest phase of the online safety rollout. Businesses should already be well-advanced in their compliance work if they operate a search engine or any online service which allows users to interact with each other or encounter their content ('user-to-user' services). Those businesses should already have completed an illegal content risk assessment by March 2025 and implemented appropriate safety measures. And they should also have completed a children's access assessment by April 2025 to determine whether children might use their platforms, triggering comprehensive children's risk‑assessment requirements. 'Any services which missed the deadlines for earlier assessments could already be at risk of enforcement action from Ofcom, and may now be automatically deemed as likely to be accessed by children, triggering the children's risk‑assessment requirements. 'Even if a business missed the deadline, they should note that the 'child access assessments' need to be carried out annually to determine whether a user-to-user service or search service is likely to be accessed by a significant number of children. 'To determine whether a service is likely to be accessed by children, the business must consider whether it's technically possible for children to use the service – something that can only be confidently ruled out if the service uses highly effective age‑assurance tools such as facial age estimation, digital ID verification or photo‑ID matching at first use; simply stating a minimum age in your terms of service is not enough. If it's technically possible for children to access the service, the business must consider other factors, like whether their commercial strategy relies on children accessing the service and whether the content or design of the service is likely to appeal to children. If any of those apply, then it is likely to be accessed by children, which means that the business must carry out a further risk assessment and implement appropriate measures. David added: 'While the headline fines under the Online Safety Act (up to £18m or 10% of worldwide revenue) may sound daunting, enforcement will focus on cases where non-compliance poses real risk, particularly to children. Business should also consider the reputational consequences of Ofcom publishing details of investigations. 'Ofcom has already launched enforcement programmes to monitor whether businesses are complying with their illegal content risk assessment duties and their children's risk assessment duties."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Jay Slater had taken drugs and was on 14-hour walk before he died, inquest hears
Teenager Jay Slater had taken drugs and alcohol before attempting the fatal 14-hour walk home, the inquest into his death heard. Bradley Geoghegan, who had gone on holiday with Mr Slater, said the 19-year-old had taken ecstasy pills, and possibly ketamine, along with cocaine and alcohol, on the night out before he disappeared. Mr Slater, who had earlier been forced to leave a nightclub because he was so drunk, instead of going back to the apartment he shared with Mr Geoghegan, went to an Airbnb, miles away, with two men they had met on the holiday. The next morning Mr Geoghegan said he got a video call from Mr Slater, who was walking along a road and was still 'under the influence', Preston Coroner's Court heard. More follows..
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Boy denies he was ‘worked up into a rage' before he stabbed pupil to death
A 15-year-old boy has told a jury he does not remember stabbing a fellow pupil to death at their school and denied he had worked himself 'up into a rage'. The teenager was repeatedly shown CCTV footage of the moment he stabbed Harvey Willgoose, also 15, twice in the chest at All Saints Catholic High School in Sheffield – sometimes in slow motion. But the boy said his memory of what happened stopped 'just before I stabbed him'. Richard Thyne KC, prosecuting, took the boy moment by moment through the CCTV footage of the incident on Thursday, asking him: 'Are you saying that you don't remember any of that?' The boy, who was giving evidence for a sixth day in his trial, said: 'Yes.' Mr Thyne said: 'The prosecution case is that you had not lost control of your actions.' The defendant replied: 'Well, I did lose control.' The prosecutor then asked him if he had 'worked yourself up into a rage about Harvey'. The boy said: 'I didn't get myself worked up over Harvey.' Mr Thyne said: 'The prosecution case is what you can see there is controlled aggression by you. What do you say about that? The defendant replied: 'There wasn't control.' The prosecutor said: 'When you stabbed Harvey in the chest, in that moment you intended either to kill him or cause him really serious harm. What do you say about that?' The boy told the jury: 'No, I didn't.' Mr Thyne said: 'Having seen now what you did, what kind of harm do you think you intended?' He replied: 'I didn't intend no harm to him.' Mr Thyne said: 'Are you saying that you can't remember the stabbing as you don't want to tell the jury the real answer?' The boy said: 'No.' The jury has heard All Saints' headteacher Sean Pender describe how the defendant said 'I'm not right in the head' shortly after the stabbing. The boy told the jury on Thursday that this was not right and he had said 'my head's not right' to Mr Pender. Mr Thyne said: 'Are you trying to twist things now?' and the boy said: 'No.' The prosecutor pointed out that, according to Mr Pender, the defendant told the head that he had stabbed Harvey twice but now he could not remember. The boy said: 'It was in the moment and it was, like, three minutes after I stabbed him.' When Mr Thyne put to him that 'you intended to cause him really serious harm', the defendant said: 'I didn't intend nothing.' He said: 'I didn't deliberately stab him.' The court has heard that the defendant, who cannot be named, has admitted manslaughter but denies murder. He has also admitted possession of a knife on school premises. Addressing the jury at the beginning of the trial, Gul Nawaz Hussain KC, defending, said: '(The defendant) did not set out to kill or seriously hurt anyone. 'The defence say (the defendant's) actions that day were the end result of a long period of bullying, poor treatment and violence, things that built one upon another until he lost control and did tragically what we've all seen.'
