The teenage youth on trial accused of murdering 17-year-old Joshua Hall in Cam in April this year has now also denied a new alternative charge of manslaughter.

At Gloucester Crown Court on Monday (November 1) the 16-year-old defendant denied unlawfully killing Joshua on April 17, 2021.

But although the new charge was added to the indictment, prosecutor James Dawes told the jury of eight men and three women in his closing speech that the Crown still maintain the youth should be convicted by them of murder.

Mr Dawes said: "The defendant signed a statement while he was being questioned by police that he went to the sports ground with two others and claimed that Joshua had made it clear to him that he wanted a fight."

"But he admitted during this trial that this part of his statement was not true. He said it was not a deliberate lie but stated that he was confused because he was in strange environment, stressed and not in the best frame of mind.

"He wanted the police to believe that Joshua had insulted him and that he was the aggressor.

"The start of the fight is important as the defendant tried to lie to the police, but does that mean he is guilty? What this tells you is that he is prepared to lie. If he is willing to lie about that to the police, this should be taken into account when making your decision.

"The prosecution say that the defendant was not acting in self-defence as he had a concealed knife.

"The defendant had suggested during cross examination that Joshua impaled himself onto the knife, with moderate force. This is a ridiculous suggestion as the movement is not only unnatural but unrealistic.

"Additionally, the top of Joshua's left arm had also been stabbed with the knife which penetrated eight centimetres. There is no mechanism which could cause this injury other than being deliberately stabbed. Does this suggest self-defence?

"However the most shocking injury is to Joshua's left hand. The defendant's action caused the webbing to be cut right down through the muscle to the bone, and that injury has left his thumb looking like a chicken drum stick.

"Joshua had put his hand up to stop the defendant attacking him.

"What was the defendant's intention? Did he intend to cause serious bodily harm?

"The defendant chose to bring the knife to the confrontation. He engineered the meeting and tried to recruit others to come to the fight."

Edward Brown QC, defending, said in his closing speech that the jurors should put emotions aside as they examine the evidence and added: "You have to decide if the defendant intended to kill Joshua or cause him serious injury.

"The defendant has never once used a knife in a serious confrontation before, despite him having it on him.

"His account is that 'if others carry a knife, so should I.' But that does not mean that he had a murderous intent. Surely this must be a not guilty verdict?

"The defendant was shocked and horrified about what had happened to Joshua and it must have been overwhelming for him.

"If he had the intention to murder Joshua he wouldn't have been surprised or shocked when he intended to do just that.

"To put it simply, a person who did not intend to kill, or to inflict really serious injury, is going to be surprised, horrified and shocked at what has just happened, isn't he?"

The jury were reminded that when the defendant dialled the emergency services and told the call handler that he 'didn't mean to do it' and repeated the same response to the arresting police officer stating: "It was me, I did it okay. I did it. I'm so sorry I didn't mean to, honestly. Why did I do it?"

The judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, explained to the jury they should ask themselves: "Are you sure that the sharp force injury was caused by the defendant deliberately stabbing Joshua. You should then consider if he was acting in lawful self-defence.

"If someone is under attack, they are entitled to defend themselves using no more than reasonable force. If you are sure the defendant was the aggressor, then no question of self-defence arises.

"If you find that the defendant did believe he was under attack you must go on to consider if his response involved using no more than reasonable force. You must decide if what the defendant did was reasonable in light of the circumstances.

"If you are sure that he used more force than what is reasonable then you can only conclude that he was not acting in self-defence."

The trial continues today (November 2).

The youth denied murdering Joshua Hall on April 17, 2021, and manslaughter, unlawful killing, on the same date.