Edward Reeve murder: Key information as killers sentenced

Two teenage boys were found guilty of murdering him in Christchurch following a trial at Winchester Crown Court.

A senior and experienced judge heard from barristers in the court case on Tuesday, September 27, for the start of the sentencing exercise.

The Honourable Mr Justice Sweeney is expected to hand down the sentences for the teenagers, who are from Christchurch and Bournemouth respectively, at a hearing this afternoon, Wednesday, September 28.

The trial heard graphic details on how 35-year-old Mr Reeve's life came to an end in his own home in Heath Road, Walkford, nine months ago.

• RECAP: Sentencing process begins for killer teens over murder of man in his own home

Below is a summary of the trial, why the defendants have not been named and what the sentencing hearing involves.

The prosecution's case

The two boys, who were aged 16 at the time of the killing, had limited prior contact with Mr Reeve before the night of the incident.

The Christchurch teen was introduced to Mr Reeve two days before the incident, the latter wanting to buy drugs, the court heard. On leaving the address on this visit, the boy stole the victim’s computer.

On New Year's Eve he invited his co-defendant and three girls to go along to the address.

After becoming "agitated" with Mr Reeve, violence "escalated" with two knives used, in the crown's case, to stab and slash the victim in the legs, face and from behind.

Edward Reeve (Image: Dorset Police)

Blood was found in the garden, bedroom and garage door. The main injury was to Mr Reeve's stomach, with a stab wound which perforated his large and small bowels, their supporting structures and severed the left renal vein.

After the attack, the teens left and caught up with the girls, who had left the home before the incident. The prosecution said the boys "bragged" about the stabbing, while the court heard an audio recording of an exchange between the defendants and a friend of the Christchurch teen, who was in prison. They told the inmate they had "yinged someone up".

Mr Reeve's body was not discovered until January 4. Two concerned friends of the victim went to his home having not heard from him for a couple of days. They found his body and called police.

The previous day the Christchurch teen had gone to Heath Road using a Beryl bike. He stayed in the area for around 10 minutes.

The knives used in the attack have never been located, but blood found on the teenagers’ clothes had a DNA match to Mr Reeve.

Murdered denied Both defendants pleaded not guilty to murder. The Christchurch teen admitted possession of a knife, while the Bournemouth teen denied this charge.

Police in Heath Road following Edward Reeve's death

The Christchurch teen accepted stabbing Mr Reeve “three or four times” but claimed he was acting in self-defence. He said the other boy then stabbed and slashed the victim.

When asked why he went back to Heath Road days after the incident, he said he wanted to find out the “outcome” of what took place.

The Bournemouth teen said he watched his co-defendant grab a knife from a cabinet after a row started over the stolen computer.

He told the jury the Christchurch teen stabbed Mr Reeve with this knife and after Mr Reeve picked up a dumbbell, his co-accused pulled a bigger knife from his waistband and stabbed him again.

Jury verdicts

Following several weeks of evidence, the 12-person jury took seven hours to reach their deliberations.

They unanimously found the defendants guilty of murder and also that the Bournemouth teen possessed a bladed article.

In England, details on how juries reach their verdicts or the basis on which they made the conclusions they did on the evidence heard are not given.

It is for the judge to consider the facts of the case when handing down the sentences.

• GUILTY: The teenage killers who attacked 'talented musician' in his own home

Winchester Crown Court, where the trial took place and also where the sentences will be handed down

Sentencing hearing process

As the matter went to trial, the prosecutor did not need to details the facts of the case in open court at the hearing on September 27.

They began by reading detailed and emotional victim personal statements from one of Mr Reeve’s friends who found his body, as well as the victim’s parents and aunt.

They all spoke of how the Mr Reeve’s death has affected them, with several hitting out at the violent behaviour of the defendants.

• Read more: Family of murdered musician condemn 'pure evil' boys

The prosecutor then put forward where the crown placed the case in terms of a starting point for the custodial sentence the judge would impose – this was given as 17 years. Due to the age of the defendants the minimum sentence is 12 years.

The court was given submissions from the prosecution on any aggravating features, which included Mr Reeve’s vulnerability due to his disability and mental health, the suffering he experienced before his death and the attack being in his own home.

Mitigating features were also mentioned by the prosecutor, although these were expanded on by the defence counsel.

The defence barristers both gave submissions on the starting point, and the aggravating and mitigating factors, with reference to reports that had been prepared by experts on the teenagers’ backgrounds and childhoods.

Having heard from all counsel, the judge is due to give his detailed sentencing remarks at Winchester Crown Court on Wednesday, September 29.

As is often the way in the most serious cases, the Honourable Mr Justice Sweeney has indicated he will make his full remarks available to the press following the hearing.

Why can’t the boys be named?

The two defendants have been anonymised in media reporting ever since they appeared in court at Poole back in January.

During their first time in the dock in relation to Mr Reeve’s death, orders were made in relation to the identification of the teens under Section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999.

This was made due to the defendants being under 18 years old and legally considered juveniles.

The order, which is not an automatic reporting restriction, has prevented the publication of the boys’ names, addresses, identity of any school or educational establishment they attended, any place of work or a still or moving image of them.

If you are interested in court and crime news, stay up to date with all our latest updates in our dedicated Facebook group. To find out more and to join click here.