The first week of the trial of a man accused of stabbing his friend to death following a ketamine and alcohol fuelled night out has run its course.
Joe Holland, 25, was found dead in a locked downstairs bathroom in a house on Huyton House Road, Fincham, on June 8 this year. That property was the family home of James Preston, 21, who has admitted stabbing Mr Holland multiple times penetrating his heart, lung and liver.
Preston claims he was acting in self-defence and has pleaded not guilty to Mr Holland's murder and an alternative count of manslaughter. The trial began at Liverpool Crown Court on Monday but had to be restarted on Tuesday afternoon, with a new jury, after a juror's baby was taken ill.
READ MORE: My Kevin was shot and left to die on a Liverpool street. Please don't forget about him
Since then, this is what the court has heard.
Lead counsel for the prosecution, Mark Ford, KC, opening the case to the jury, said the two men were part of a group of friends who went out for a meal at Jumbo Chinese restaurant on Princess Drive, Dovecot, on Wednesday, June 7, before heading to the Deysbrook Pub, West Derby, for drinks.
CCTV footage from both venues showed members of that group openly snorting white powder, which the jury heard was ketamine, and drinking alcohol.
Mr Ford said: "The meal was the last meal that one of those young men would eat. He was Joseph, or Joe as everybody knew him, Holland. It was his last meal because within a few hours of leaving that restaurant he would be stabbed to death by the defendant in this case, James Preston.
"The next day his body was discovered by police officers who found him lying in a pool of blood in the locked bathroom of the home address of the defendant, James Preston. Next to the body was a large kitchen knife, bent out of shape. This was the weapon that the defendant James Preston used to kill Joe Holland. There were a number of stab wounds to the chest and abdomen and defensive injuries to Joe's hands."
The jury heard the men had "had a fair bit to drink" and had also taken ketamine during the night, as well as inhaling balloons of Nitrous Oxide. After leaving the pub, Preston, Mr Holland and a friend called Sean Ruud were invited back to Preston's parents' house to carry on the night, and arrived there shortly after midnight.
Other members of the group, including Preston's half-brother Darren Mulholland, 28, who was also close friends with Mr Holland, went drinking elsewhere.
Footage from a Ring doorbell camera and CCTV attached to the property showed Mr Ruud leaving Preston's house at 12.26am on June 8. Mr Ruud gave evidence on Wednesday, telling the jury the mood in Jumbo was positive. He said "It seemed ok to me everyone was chatting, just normal. Nothing out of the ordinary."
However things changed at around 12.15am, after Preston invited Mr Ruud and Mr Holland back to his parents' home, which was empty at the time as they were on holiday in Egypt.
Mr Ruud, who appeared as a witness over a video-link, said he was drinking a beer when he was suddenly "hit in the back of the head" without warning by Preston.
He told the jury: "It didn’t put me on the floor like. I can just remember being backed into the corner as he tried to kick me. Joe was saying what have you done, what have you done, James is calling me a rat, I am saying 'what are you on about?'."
Mr Ruud said the attack stopped after Mr Holland intervened, and he realised he had a mark under his left eye which he believed had been caused by a kick from Preston. The jury saw an image of the picture to his face, showing a graze with three "linear" red marks underneath.
He told the jury he demanded to know why he had just been attacked, but Preston and Mr Holland ignored him and carried on inhaling balloons filled with nitrous oxide, so he "stormed out". CCTV showed him leaving the property holding his hand to his face, while a male voice from inside the house says: "You're out of order".
Nick Johnson, KC, defending Preston, cross-examined Mr Ruud and suggested that he had been "challenged" by Preston because he was playing music too loud on the TV in the living room and "making a mess". Mr Johnson asked whether Ruud had "got into his face" when Preston told him to be quiet, and whether "that was the sort of thing you would do".
Mr Ruud replied: "No I'm not an aggressive person", and said he could not recall any confrontation over the volume of the music. Mr Johnson also suggested that Preston's parents' home no longer looked like it did at the time due to an arson attack, telling the jury "someone torched it".
He asked Mr Ruud if he knew who was responsible, which the witness denied.
The jury heard that at around 12.47am, Mr Holland called Mr Mulholland "sounding upset", and Mr Mulholland told him he should leave the address. In his opening, Mr Ford told the jury: "Over the next hour or so Darren Mulholland made a number of attempts to speak to Joe, and James Preston, by telephone and he did so because he was concerned for Joe Holland's safety."
Mr Mulholland also gave evidence, telling the jury he had been told about an "argument" between Mr Ruud and Preston. Describing the call from Mr Holland at 12.47am, he said: "He didn’t tell me why, he just 'come and get me, come and get me. I said get a taxi I can't come and get you. The phone calls after that. Then I was concerned, what had gone on."
Mr Mulholland added that Mr Holland "just didn't sound right". As the night wore on, he attempted to call Mr Holland multiple times, and also called Preston. At one point he became so concerned he left his girlfriend's home and drove towards Huyton House Road.
He told the jury he managed to get through to James Preston at around 12.57am, who told him "Joe had got a taxi". He said he was within 250 yards of the house when he learned this news, and decided to leave.
After leaving Huyton House Road, he drove to Mr Holland's house, trying to call him but failing to connect. The court heard he sent a number of messages, including: "I'm outside yours you crab" and at 1am, "f***** answer Joe". At 1.14am, he messaged Mr Holland: "Answer me, so I know you’re ok".
When asked why he had sent that message, he said: "I was just wanting him to answer. He just weren’t answering the phone to me. I was just losing me head. I thought he wasn’t answering because he was drunk or he had left his phone on the side. "
However Mr Mulholland said he thought he saw a light on in Mr Holland's bedroom, so left and went home. He also said he spoke to another friend, Sam Harris, who told him he thought he'd heard that Mr Holland had left with Mr Ruud, which Mr Mulholland said "settled his mind".
The following day, still concerned, he said he went round to Mr Holland's home and was informed by his dad that he had not returned. He told the jury: "Then I was very worried, I went straight through and picked Sam Harris up. Went to James Preston’s knocked on, tried to get keys but we couldn’t get the keys. Then we called the police and told them the situation."
Mr Mulholland said he stood at the front door as the police entered the house. Mr Ford said: "What did you find out?.
Mr Mulholland replied: "He was dead in there."
During his opening address, Mr Ford told the jury the body was discovered by a PC Parrot. He said: "When she did she discovered the lifeless body of Joe Holland behind the door. He and the area in which he was lying were heavily bloodstained. A knife was present in the bathroom. It was bloodstained and had a bent blade."
Mr Ford held the weapon, which was still stained with Mr Holland's blood, up to the jury, with the blade visibly bent into a semi-circle shape. Members of Mr Holland's family became visibly upset in the public gallery.
Mr Ford added: "Police found a note in the bath, on a DVLA form belonging to the defendant, was a hand written comment in blue highlighter, which said this; 'Words can’t explain this situation, I’m sorry I didn’t know what else to do'. On the other side was written “it was me or him”.
The jury heard that before leaving the address Preston had tried to clean up the scene. However forensic examiners were able to find traces of Mr Holland's blood in the kitchen area, which Mr Ford suggested he had been attacked there before moving to the bathroom.
The jury heard that at 5.30am, a Ring doorbell camera recorded Preston leaving the property carrying a holdall bag. He was taken to Liverpool Lime Street station by taxi, where he boarded the 6.04am train to London. However he changed at Runcorn station, boarding a service to Birmingham.
The jury heard that before leaving the address Preston had tried to clean up the scene. However forensic examiners were able to find traces of Mr Holland's blood in the kitchen area, which Mr Ford suggested he had been attacked there before moving to the bathroom.
Following a post-mortem, a pathologist concluded that Mr Holland's body showed signs of 11 "incised wounds". Two of those injuries were "particularly serious", including a 11-13cm deep stab wound to the upper left of his chest which severed a rib, penetrated his lung and pierced his heart.
The jury heard from Dr Anthony Bleetman, a pathologist expert witness called by the defence, who was allowed to give evidence during the prosecution case due to being unavailable next week.
Dr Bleetman confirmed he had been asked by the defence to consider whether any injuries to Mr Holland could have been caused in a scenario where he was holding the knife himself. The jury heard he was provided with an extract of Preston's defence statement, giving his account of how the fatal incident occurred.
That statement said: "Believing that Joseph Holland was trying to kill him, James Preston got a grip on the hand in which Joseph Holland held the knife. In the struggle to gain possession of the knife, the knife was time and again forced against the person of Mr Holland and some of the injuries to Mr Holland would have been gained in this struggle, in which both men came against kitchen furniture
"At some stage the knife was dropped. Mr Preston picked it up and swung the knife at Mr Holland, who fell backwards against kitchen furniture. It was that action that ended the struggle. It became clear that Mr Holland was dead."
He told the jury it was "extremely unlikely" that Mr Holland was holding the knife when those injuries were inflicted.
Referring to the first wound, he said: "The force required to plunge a knife into the body and sever a rib, and continue into the body after severing a rib, would have required a very significant large amount of force."
Mr Johnson asked: "Is that force all necessarily coming from the person with the knife?".
Dr Bleetman said: "It could be a summation of forces from both parties. If the person is applying the knife, and should the victim of that wound be running towards the person holding that knife, the forces could be added to produce the ultimate force that was actually transferred during that strike."
Mr Ford, cross examining Dr Bleetman on his findings, referred to a number of cuts to Mr Holland's left hand. He suggested: "He could have received those wounds as he was trying to defend himself from an attack with a knife?"
Dr Bleetman said: "He could have done yes", further agreeing that those injuries could have been "a parry or an attempt to grab the blade". Mr Ford said: "Either way self defence?". Dr Bleetman said: "Yes."
Mr Ford turned to another injury on the back of Mr Holland's head, described as a "through and through" wound where the knife had penetrated the skin and re-emerged again. He said: "Does it therefore follow it’s possible this stab wound was caused when Joe Holland had his back to his assailant?"
Dr Bleetman said: "It's possible, or the wound could have from the side or an oblique angle."
Mr Ford said: "Yes. One real possibility is that he had his back to the defendant, who came up behind him and used the knife to stab him in the back of the head?"
Dr Bleetman said: "That is possible."
Mr Ford said Preston's phone was traced to the Dover area. However he handed himself in to police in the Ashford area of Kent on June 10, and was arrested, with officers finding he had his passport in his possession.
He was transferred to Merseyside and interviewed, but answered no comment to all questions. The jury heard his solicitor provided his interviewers with prepared statement, which said he was assaulted by Mr Holland and had acted in self-defence.
In his opening, Mr Ford said: "And so what do we say about all this? The Crown say that James Preston was the aggressor on June 8, he was not acting we say in self defence at all. When you come to consider this issue, you may wish to consider for example the number of blows struck by defendant, the force of those blows, the actions of the defendant both before and after the killing and his flight to the Kent coast with his passport, in the aftermath.
"And what of the note? We say the note he left was nothing more than an attempt by the defendant to falsely justify his murderous act and to avoid responsibility for what he had done. And that is why, ladies and gentlemen, we say on behalf of the Crown this defendant is guilty of murder."
The trial continues, with the prosecution case due to conclude early next week.
Don't miss the biggest and breaking stories by signing up to the Echo Daily newsletter here