Got a TV Licence?

You need one to watch live TV on any channel or device, and BBC programmes on iPlayer. It’s the law.

Find out more
I don’t have a TV Licence.

Live Reporting

By Claire Timms and Thomas Mackintosh

All times stated are UK

  1. Jury sent home

    Judge Wendy Joseph QC has paused her summing up for the day and will continue tomorrow.

    The 12 jurors have been sent home for the rest of the day and the trial will resume at 10:00 tomorrow morning.

  2. 'Svenson Ong-a-Kwie urgently wanted a lift from Manuel Petrovic'

    forensics

    During Svenson Ong-a-Kwie's defence, he told the court he bumped into an old customer called 'Dreads', Judge Wendy Joseph QC recalled.

    She said that according to Mr Ong-a-Kwie, he was "anxious to rebuild" his drug customer base and told Dreads that he would give him some cannabis and would meet him in Amy's Park later that evening.

    Judge Joseph added: "As they passed a shop, the teenager said 'stop' and the teenager added that he 'had seen someone he had beef with'.

    "The teenager said that was not true [in his evidence]. A deal was done in Chippenham Road and in Macefield Crescent.

    "They went back to his hostel and Mahbubal Haque refused to take them back to Harold Hill.

    "Instead, Svenson tried to contact Manuel with a view to him giving him a lift.

    "There are exchanges between him and Manuel urging the other to ring but not having the credit to do so.

    "Svenson made it clear he urgently wanted a lift from Manuel."

  3. 'It must have felt like an ordinary Friday evening'

    Flowers at crime scene

    Friday 1 March "must have been a perfectly ordinary Friday evening" Judge Wendy Joseph QC told the court - referring to Jodie Chesney and her friends sitting in Amy's Park.

    She added: "Just like the defendants said they had a perfectly ordinary Friday evening doing something different."

    Before Jodie was stabbed in the back, Svenson Ong-a-Kwie was driven in a cab to deal some drugs around parts of Harold Hill.

    "Mahbubal Haque said he could not recall much, on one occasion one of passengers got out of his taxi while another stayed in."

  4. 'Rival drug dealer had a large share of the market'

    Amy's Park

    Judge Wendy Joseph QC recalled evidence from Bryce Henderson who told the jury he was having "an issue" getting cannabis from Svenson Ong-a-Kwie.

    Instead, the 18-year-old went to a drug dealer called Jade who Judge Joseph described as someone who "had a large share of the market" in Harold Hill where Mr Ong-a-Kwie operated in.

    Judge Joseph said: "Clarice Sharp called the group to say she would be with them shortly and she then arrived.

    "She said it was so dark she had to use the light on her phone to find the gate.

    "She sat on the table with the others around her and said there was no interaction between them at all."

  5. 'Jodie had her hair down when she was stabbed'

    Eddie Coyle

    After a brief pause for the jury to have a mid-afternoon break, Judge Wendy Joseph QC continued her summing up.

    Recalling to Eddie Coyle's evidence, Judge Joseph said: "Jodie had her hair down that night.

    "Whatever the discrepancies about times, we know when the incident happened as we know when the 999 call was made.

    "There is no dispute, whenever Jodie's friends arrived and departed, there were two other people in the park

    "In the dark he could not see, but described one as having a white puffa jacket."

  6. What is cell site data analysis?

    Danny Shaw

    BBC Home Affairs Correspondent

    Cell site analysis is a way of establishing the location of a mobile phone at a particular time.

    Each time a phone is switched on, to access the Internet, to make or receive calls, or send of view texts or social media messages it connects to a network via telecommunication masts.

    The location of the masts is recorded and can help determine approximately where the phone is and where it moves to.

  7. Judge starts to talk about day of fatal stabbing

    Video content

    Video caption: CCTV of three accused killers in cafe before Jodie Chesney stabbing

    After referring to a number of other dates in the lead up to Friday 1 March, Judge Wendy Joseph QC has started to take the jury through evidence on the day Jodie Chesney was stabbed to death.

    The judge began by talking about phone contact between the defendats who arrange to meet at the Cafe 23 in Collier Row.

    Svenson Ong-a-Kwie sent a number of text messages on his drugs lines, Judge Joseph told the court.

    The four defendants split up into two groups - Mr Ong-a-Kwie and the 17-year-old boy; and Manuel Petrovic and the 16-year-old boy - and spent the afternoon dealing drugs around parts of Romford, Harold Hill and Collier Row.

  8. 'Svenson Ong-a-Kwie was stabbed in the leg'

    Months before Jodie Chesney was stabbed on 1 March, three of the defendants were present at a separate incident where a teenager was stabbed in Romford on 6 September.

    Judge Wendy Joseph recalled CCTV evidence which showed Svenson Ong-a-Kwie getting off the back of a motorbike and a car which was being driven by the 17-year-old defendant.

    About a month later, Mr Ong-a-Kwie was stabbed in the back of the leg, Judge Joseph told the court.

    She said: "Emergency services went to his mother's address, they saw Svenson get out of a minicab and he told them he was stabbed in the back of the thigh.

    "Manuel said Svenson mentioned it to him in January."

  9. 'Svenson Ong-a-Kwie was kicked out by his mother'

    Svenson Ong-a-Kwie

    Svenson Ong-a-Kwie began buying drugs from Manuel Petrovic in 2014, Judge Wendy Joseph QC told the court.

    She said the 19-year-old spent time being sent away to live with his father, but returned to live in Collier Row.

    "He was kicked out by his mum and a court sent him to live in a hostel in Hillfoot Road.

    "He continued to sell cannabis, but insisted by the end of 2018 he was no longer handling Class A drugs and no longer handled knives."

  10. 'Manuel Petrovic developed his own drugs line'

    Manuel Petrovic and Sarah Forshaw QC

    Manuel Petrovic was a habitual drug dealer from a young age, Judge Wendy Joseph QC told the court.

    She said: "He dealt first in Collier Row and then in Romford, he then developed his own drugs line and held drugs lines for other people.

    "His parents lived elsewhere and he took the 16-year-old defendant under his wing - by this he gave him food and cannabis.

    "By the end of 2018 he had become a companion."

  11. 'Two groups of friends are central to this case'

    Eddie Coyle giving evidence
    Image caption: Eddie Coyle gave evidence from behind a screen

    After the jury returned from their one-hour lunch break Judge Wendy Joseph QC started to summarise the evidence the jury has heard over the last eight weeks.

    She began by refreshing why she allowed some witnesses to give evidence from behind a screen.

    She said: "Some witnesses have had a screen because they are particularly nervous or distressed - that means they can all focus on you [the jury] when giving their evidence.

    "Let's start with the background with the two groups of people. One is Jodie and her friends, the others are the defendants."

  12. Jury sent for lunch

    The panel of 12 jurors have been sent away for their one-hour lunch break.

    Judge Wendy Joseph QC will continue her summing up at 14:00 GMT.

  13. 'He told lies to protect his family and himself'

    Amy's Park

    Judge Wendy Joseph QC has read out the details from the defendants' interviews after each of them were arrested on suspicion of Jodie Chesney's murder.

    Manuel Petrovic prepared a statement, while Svenson Ong-a-Kwie said "no comment" out of the fear of his family's safety, Judge Joseph said.

    The 17-year-old defendant accepted in his police interview he lied in the following ways:

    • Did not know Svenson Ong-a-Kwie was wanted by police
    • He thought police had come to his house on a drugs raid

    Judge Joseph said: "He said his reason for lies were to protect himself and his family and secondly he knew he had been in the park with Svenson and he feared he might be in trouble."

  14. Teenage defendant, 17, has previous for knife carrying

    Judge Wendy Joseph QC continued with the bad character details and moved onto the 17-year-old's previous convictions.

    These included being in possession of a bladed article and has a conviction for causing actual bodily harm.

    Judge Joseph added: "Shortly before his arrest he threw away a rucksack containing a knife, but no one is suggesting that is the knife which stabbed Jodie."

  15. Judge deals with context of 'bad character' of the defendants

    Svenson Ong-a-Kwie, Manuel Petrovic and a prison officer
    Image caption: Svenson Ong-a-Kwie, Manuel Petrovic and a prison officer listen to evidence in the Jodie Chesney murder trial

    The jury has returned from their mid-morning break and Judge Wendy Joseph QC has started to explain the previous "bad character" instances relating to the four defendants.

    Manuel Petrovic, 20, has various driving offences and the 16-year-old boy was once caught setting fire to a bus seat.

    Svenson Ong-a-Kwie, 19, has previous convictions for being concerned in the supply of cocaine, being in possession of Class A and Class B drugs and for handling stolen goods.

    Judge Joseph added: "He has no convictions for violence, but you have seen him act violently.

    "When he got off the motorbike in September 2018 and attacked a teenager."

  16. Jury sent for mid-morning break

    Judge Wendy Joseph QC has finished dealing with a recap of the expert analysis and will continue her directions of law after a short mid-morning break.

    The trial will resume at 11:40 GMT.

  17. 'Svenson was holding an object at waist height in the park'

    Svenson Ong-a-Kwie

    A few weeks ago the jury heard evidence from Ashley Windsor who is a CCTV expert.

    He showed a number of clips to the jury and Judge Wendy Joseph QC recalled one aspect of his evidence when Svenson Ong-a-Kwie and the 17-year-old boy went into Amy's Park on the night of 1 March.

    She said: "Ashley Windsor concluded that Svenson was holding an object at waist height which reflected light

    "It was not the light of a mobile phone screen, this was light that was reflecting - which could include knife or the body work of a phone.

    "The Crown said it was a knife, the defence said it was a body work of the phone and that is for you to decide."

    Judge Joseph also recalled the cell site evidence which was given to the jury when the prosecution was laying out its case.

  18. 'The knife almost went through Jodie Chesney's body'

    Crime scene

    After reading out the steps to the verdicts the jury must take, Judge Wendy Joseph QC started to remind the jury of the evidence heard from the various experts who came to court.

    "Let's begin with pathology," she said. "Dr Fegan Earl is an expert Home Office pathologist.

    "There was only one relevenat injury he found - the one which killed her.

    "He found a stab wound. It was in her back. It was 8cm to her right on her spine and it was below the lower right shoulder blade.

    "When he saw the wound it was gaping open. He looked at the shape of the wound.

    "It suggested to him a single-cutting edge with the blade pointing to Jodie's right.

    "The knife passed through her skin and up and backwards - through the underlying layer of flat, through the space of her ribs and came out the front side of her ribs.

    "It ended just a few milimetres from the skin at the front.

    "In other words the knife went almost right through her.

    "He found bruising to her knees consisting with her collapsing.

    "She went into clinical shock and she died."

  19. Steps to verdict for those who did not stab Jodie Chesney

    For any defendant you are not sure is the stabber, consider the following.

    4a) Are you sure that at the time of the fatal stabbing, he intentionally participated in it?

    • A person may participate only by intentionally assisting the stabber in his offence. It is sufficient for this if he was intentionally present and lending assistance, or intentionally nearby in order to lend assistance in case of need, or intentionally encouraging with acts/words or by intentionally providing support e.g. to bring the stabber to and take him from the scene intending to provide assistance to him in the attack. However mere association or presence (without one of the above) is insufficient to prove participation.
    • If you are not sure of this he is not guilty. If you are sure go to 'b'.
    Amy's Park crime scene

    b) Are you sure he intended to participate in the stabber's crime. A defendant who was not the stabber, cannot be guilty of a crime more serious than the stabber himself committed. So your consideration now will depend on what crime you concluded the stabber committed i.e. murder or manslaughter.

    • If you found the stabber committed the murder: are you sure the defendant who was participating in the stabbing, himself intended the stabber's victim should die or at least be caused really serious harm. If you are sure of this, he too is guilty of murder. If you are not sure of this but are sure he intended the stabber's victim be caused at least some serious harm (short of really serious harm) he is not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. If you are not sure of this, he is not guilty of anything.
    • If you found the stabber committed manslaughter: are you sure the defendant who was participating in the stabbing himself, intended the stabber's victim should be caused at least some harm (short of really serious harm). If you are sure of this, he too is guilty of manslaughter. If you are not sure of this he is not guilty of anything.
  20. 'Only two of the defendants could have stabbed Jodie'

    Crime scene

    Judge Wendy Joseph continued reading out the steps to verdict and told the jury it was clear only two of the defendants could have stabbed Jodie Chesney - Svenson Ong-a-Kwie and the 17-year-old boy.

    She read out another step to the verdict under the heading 'the stabber':

    3. If you are sure a defendant was the stabber, consider the following:a) Are you sure the act of stabbing was a deliberate act?

    • No one suggests the stabbing was anything other than deliberate.
    • It is irrelevant that the stabber may have mistaken his target. If he deliberately lifted the knife and drove it into another person, the stabbing is deliberate
    • Go to b

    b) Are you sure the stabber intended to cause death or at least really serious harm?

    • If you are sure the stabber intended to cause death or at least really serious harm, he is guilty of murder. If you are not sure of this, but you are sure he intented to cause at least some harm he is not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter