you ran back to the car, you fired the last few shots at the group, and then drove away at speed to the safety as you had planned it of thomas waring s home. i am satisfied that you asked him to look after the gun and you asked him to help destroy the stolen mercedes six days later. as the jury have found you knew that chapman had carried out the shooting and he had merited elle edwards when you agree to help in the disposing of the car. murdered. he also knew the police wanted to arrest chapman. the murder of elle edwards has caused profound and permanent grief to her family and permanent grief to her family and a great shock to the entire community. she was a very much loved young woman, in her prime, killed by you, chapman, when you were prepared to kill anyone in your determination for gang revenge. this court has heard exceptionally moving statements from elle edwards s family, by herfather, brother, grandmother, and they will never be able to come to terms with what
did, the premeditation, the choice of location and weapon used, it was fired 12 times, the efforts he made to destroy evidence, and also the fact that against all this is a background of drugs dealing and he was on an injunction, he should not even be living where he was living at the time, the only thing that gave him a bit of credit was the fact that he was 22 at the time of the offence and relatively young. the judge, the offence and relatively young. thejudge, mrjustice goose, did say there was no significant mitigation in this case for him to consider? that s right. the only factor that he could take into account was that he could take into account was that he is a young man, he is 22, we know from scientific evidence that the brains of young people carry on developing until 25. and judges do take that into consideration in sentencing but it s only a small amount, given the exceptionally
statements from elle edwards s family, by herfather, brother, grandmother, and they will never be able to come to terms with what has happened to elle. the seriousness of this offence of murder count one is very substantially aggravated by the following evidence. the choice of weapon, which was exceptionally dangerous, the location of the offence with many people present on christmas eve, the background of criminal gang violence, the substantial preparation and premeditation, the removal or obstruction of important evidence including the car, phones and clothing as well as the washing of clothes, the fact you were the subject of criminal gang injunctions and as you told the jury you were dealing in classy drugs. apart from your age at the time of offending, being 22, you are now 23, there is no significant mitigation. while the
also some journalists who were allowed in court as well. because of the numbers of people that wanted to be present, there was also an annex court where there were other journalists that were in there as well, there was such huge interest. and what we were led through was a detailing of the events of the night of christmas eve, if you watch the television or had the radeon christmas day you will remember elle edwards s case and what happened, and the judge took us through what had happened on the night, the prosecution did as well. and explained why this was such a serious case in terms of the preparation, the premeditation that had gone on, the weapon that had been used, this was a czech army made submachine gun called a scorpion gun, brutal weapon, made submachine gun called a scorpion gun, brutalweapon, it made submachine gun called a scorpion gun, brutal weapon, it can shoot 14 rounds in one second, it is designed with just one purpose in mind, and that is to kill, and when