Jury retires to consider verdicts in murder trial of Farnham schoolboy Luis Guembes

The jury in the trial of two teenagers accused of murdering 15-year-old Luis Guembes in a Guildford park has retired to consider its verdicts.

The four women and eight men began deliberating shortly after 11.40am on Monday, November 9, following Ms Justice Norton's summing-up of the evidence heard at the trial, which began on October 19.

Luis died after being stabbed in the grounds of the Wildwood Adventure Centre in Stoke Park on January 19.

Defendant 1, who was 15 at the time and is now 16, denies murder, conspiracy to rob and possession of a bladed article.

Defendant 2, who was 16 at the time, denies murder but has already pleaded guilty to conspiracy to rob and possession of a bladed article.

The jury must now assess conflicting accounts of what happened before, during and after the confrontation that led to Luis's death.

Among the key evidence against Defendant 1 are videos recorded before and after the fatal confrontation.

In one video, recorded before the incident, he said: “What you saying guys about go stain some, silly yute bro like. Helping out Defendant 2, yeah, you know how it is. Yeah, I'll let you know, innit.”

The prosecution and Defendant 2's defence argue this shows Defendant 1 knew of the plan to rob Luis.

However, Defendant 1 maintains he made the video to placate his co-defendant.

In another video, recorded after the incident, Defendant 1 described a violent confrontation with Luis, saying: “I stabbed him bro and I think Defendant 2 did as well.”

He also said: “Bro, why would he fight back and not give his stuff up, bro? Literally could not have gone worse.”

Defendant 1 accepted that parts of his recorded account were true, including that he grabbed Luis, but denied stabbing him.

He told the court he had lied about the stabbing to make his co-defendant believe him.

The jury must also consider forensic evidence concerning the knives recovered by police.

Neither knife was found to have Luis's blood or DNA on it.

Forensic pathologist Dr Anna Biddlestone said both knives were “unlikely” to have caused the fatal wound to Luis's back, although she could not rule either out.

The prosecution's case does not require the jury to establish which defendant inflicted the fatal injury, provided the legal requirements for murder are proved.

Defendant 2 admitted planning to rob Luis to “make some money” and compensate himself for a phone he claimed Luis had broken during an earlier incident at Foxenden Quarry.

He told the court he lured Luis to Stoke Park under the false pretence that they would be robbing somebody else.

He also admitted planning for both defendants to carry knives, believing their presence would make Luis more likely to surrender his belongings.

Defendant 2 accepted that he was the first to brandish a knife and became involved in a fight with Luis, but denied stabbing him.

Luis's blood was subsequently found on items of Defendant 2's clothing recovered from outside his bedroom window, as well as on a soap dish at his home.

Forensic expert Claire Morse said the findings could be explained by Defendant 2 having assaulted Luis or having been involved in a struggle with him.

The jury must decide whether the prosecution has proved the murder charge against either defendant, as well as the outstanding robbery and knife charges against Defendant 1.

The trial continues.