Teenager who shot boy in face in Kesgrave said he would 'probably kill again', court told
Sentencing has been adjourned
A teenager who shot a 15-year-old boy in the face with a double-barrelled shotgun as he walked to school said weeks later in custody that he would "probably kill again", a court has heard.
His victim, who had known him since primary school, survived the attack but is partially paralysed and his father told a court he will "never have the life he was destined for".
The victim said, in a statement read to Ipswich Crown Court, that he had "tried to be a compassionate friend" to his attacker.
The 16-year-old defendant shot the boy as he walked to school in Kesgrave, near Ipswich, Suffolk, on September 7 last year on the first day back since the first national lockdown.
He was found guilty, following an earlier trial, of attempted murder.
Judge Martyn Levett, reading from a pre-sentence report, said the defendant made comments during an activity at a secure unit, 20 days after the attack.
During a game of Jenga, "as each brick was removed each young person was asked 'what will you do when you leave here?'
"(The defendant's) response to this question was 'probably kill again'.
"Another young person then asked (the defendant) 'are you going to go for murder?'.
"Answer - 'I don't know, I don't know if he's dead'."
The judge said that a worker at the unit then told the young people they were not supposed to discuss their offences.
"One of the other questions asked was 'what would you like to do later in life?'," the judge said, reading from the report.
"(The defendant's) answer was 'I will probably be inside until I'm 40 and I would like to be famous for chemical warfare'."
The judge said he would consider whether the comments were "bravado" and asked for further evidence.
Prosecutor Riel Karmy-Jones QC, reading statements from medics, said the victim had more than a dozen operations under general anaesthetic, including one to remove a section of his skull to reduce pressure on his brain.
She said someone has to supervise him while walking "in case he became unstable", and he "requires adaptions for many tasks" such as using cutlery.
His injuries have had a "significant emotional impact on him", Ms Karmy-Jones said.
The victim said he previously played musical instruments and enjoyed hiking and going to the gym.
"I'm no longer able to pursue these, my passions," he said, adding: "He's ruined my career aspirations."
The victim's father told the court: "He will never have the life he was destined for, never have the happiness he deserves."
He described seeing his son on the ground bleeding "missing half his face".
"I genuinely believed there was no chance of survival," he said.
"This image and the moments until the ambulance arrived will haunt me forever."
He said he spent 75 days at his son's bedside in hospital and worried if he would wake in a "vegetative state".
He went on: "How do you tell your son he's been shot... by someone he knows?"
The victim's mother described him as "a young man who had so much talent, who worked so hard during lockdown".
She said that "our world was shattered", describing his attacker as "evil, full of hatred".
The trial was told that the victim was shot from less than 1.5 metres away.
The defendant said in evidence he wanted to "scare" the boy, who had caused him "humiliation and fear", and that he fired the gun unintentionally.
The defendant took his father's car and drove to the location where he lay in wait for the boy for more than an hour before he shot him with his grandfather's Beretta, said prosecutor Ms Karmy-Jones.
He drove from the scene and was arrested later that morning by armed police as he sat in the parked car five miles away in Ipswich, with officers describing him as "smiling".
The defendant was found guilty of attempted murder and of possession of a shotgun with intent to endanger the boy's life.
He previously admitted possession of a shotgun with intent to cause fear of injury to the boy.
Today's (3 September) sentencing hearing was adjourned to 24 September after the judge requested more information about the defendant.