Queen v Michael Massey and Luke Hawkins
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Stephens J |
| Judgment Date | 25 January 2008 |
| Neutral Citation | [2008] NICC 2 |
| Court | Crown Court (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 25 January 2008 |
| Year | 2008 |
1
Neutral Citation no. [2008] NICC 2 Ref:
STEC7008
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered:
25/01/08
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN THE CROWN COURT IN NORTHERN IRELAND
________
THE QUEEN
v
MICHAEL MASSEY AND LUKE HAWKINS
________
STEPHENS J
Introduction
[1] Michael James Massey and Luke Hawkins on Tuesday 4 December
2007 on the sixth day of your trial a second count was added to the
indictment. You were then both arraigned on that count and you each
pleaded guilty to the offence of conspiracy to wound contrary to Section 20 of
the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and Section 9 of the Criminal
Attempts and Conspiracy (Northern Ireland) Order 1983. The particulars of
the offence being that on 20 August 2005 in Newtownards, County Down,
you conspired together with other persons not before the court to wound
Jonathan Hillier.
[2] Under the first count on the indictment you had been jointly charged
that you had each attempted to murder Jonathan Hillier on 20 August 2005.
You were arraigned in relation to that count on 17 November 2006 and
pleaded not guilty. After you each had pleaded guilty to the new count on
the indictment no evidence was offered by the prosecution in relation to the
first count and accordingly I entered verdicts of not guilty in relation to the
charge that you each had attempted to murder Jonathan Hillier.
Factual background
[3] The factual background has been outlined to this court at some length
by Mr Kerr QC on behalf of the prosecution when opening the case at the start
of the trial. The injured party, Jonathan Hillier, was a taxi driver operating in
the Newtownards area. At 12.20 am on 20 August 2005 Mr Hillier’s taxi was
2
third in line at a taxi rank in Regent Street, Newtownards. Both of you were
waiting for a taxi but ignored the first two taxis at the taxi rank. You both got
into Mr Hillier’s taxi. You, Luke Hawkins, got into the front passenger seat
and you, Michael Massey, got into the rear of the vehicle. You, Michael
Massey, then made a mobile telephone call and you were heard to say,
“That’s us, we will be there in a few minutes”. There was discussion in the
taxi to the effect that you were both going to a party. Mr Hillier was directed
to an address at 8 Stirling Avenue in the West Winds estate, Newtownards. It
did not look to Mr Hillier that a party was in progress at that address. He
parked his taxi in a small car parking area. You, Luke Hawkins, then got out
of front passenger seat and went around the front of the taxi towards the
driver’s side. Neither of you participated in the actual physical attack that
then ensued. Mr Hillier was aware of something behind him. He heard a
bang and noise consistent with glass breaking. He became alarmed and
decided to reverse his vehicle but observed a small blue car blocking his path
from behind. He attempted to drive over the pavement to his front but was
unable to drive away from the scene. He then ran from Stirling Avenue and
as he did so he heard shots. He felt numbness and pain. He ultimately
arrived at 10 Cumberland Park in the West Winds estate. He had gunshot
wounds to his neck and left chest. It subsequently transpired that he had a
pneumothorax in his left chest. He also had a fracture of the transverse
process of his first thoracic vertebrae and a fracture of the inferior aspect of
the seventh cervical vertebrae. Two bullets were removed under local
anaesthetic.
[4] In advance of today’s hearing the factual basis of the prosecution case,
to which you have both pleaded guilty, has been set out in a written
submission to the court (“the submission”). The submission was made
available to your respective counsel, Mr. John McCrudden Q.C. and Mr.
Adair Q.C. It has been agreed as being accurate by your counsel in an
amended form.
[5] I set out that part of the submission which deals with the factual basis
of the prosecution case to which you have pleaded guilty.
1. The prosecution accepted a plea of guilty of conspiracy to wound
contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
2. The prosecution say that by their plea both acknowledge that they
were aware of and knew that the (injured party) was to be subjected by
others to a physical attack which might be sufficiently serious to cause
wounding to him.
3. They agreed to and did lure the (injured party) to the location where
the attack took place and they informed their co conspirators that the
(injured party) was on his way to that location.
4. It is accepted that they are not proved to have known the exact nature
of the attack nor intended that it would definitely cause wounding or
To continue reading
Request your trial
1 cases
-
Queen v Ciaran Gerard Corbett and Michael Anthony Corbett
...on or after 28 September 2004, for which see Article 4 (2) (b) of the Criminal Justice (No. 2) (NI) Order 2004 and R v Massey & Hawkins [2008] NICC 2 at paragraph [2]. Mr Murphy informed the court that if the second incident had not occurred the charge against you, Michael Anthony Corbett, ......