Angus Beaumont murder appeal: Father slams process keeping ‘dangerous, psychopathic’ youths anonymous

The father of a murdered teen has hit out at Queensland’s “revolving door” youth justice system as his son’s juvenile killers – who were both repeat violent offenders – were granted anonymity as they appealed their conviction.

The parents of a murdered teen have hit out at Queensland’s “revolving door” youth justice system as their son’s juvenile killers appeal their conviction.

The repeat violent offenders were jailed in October after being found guilty of murdering Redcliffe teen Angus Beaumont, 15, who was stabbed in the heart during an altercation with the pair on March 13, 2020.

Aged 14 at the time the two young killers appealed their convictions in Brisbane’s Court of Appeal today.

The two grounds of appeal were that the jury’s guilty verdict was unreasonable and the trial judge’s directions given to the jury were insufficient.

Angus Beaumont was stabbed in the heart during an altercation with two repeat violent offenders. Picture Supplied

One of the killer’s barrister’s Andrew Hoare said the crown’s case had been that at the time of the stabbing the two offenders were engaged in a “persistent and sustained” robbery of a bag that was ultimately given to Angus.

However after Angus was stabbed and fell to the ground neither his client or co-offender made any attempt to grab the bag which was “inconsistent” with the crown case.

Mr Hoare also argued directions at trial give around a “high-five” the two killers might have given each other after the murder were “insufficient to assist the jury”.

Justices David Boddice, Jean Dalton and John Bond reserved their decision.

Outside court Angus’ emotional parents Michelle Liddle and Ben Beaumont said the appeal process had been “hard”.

Ben Beaumont and Michelle Liddle, the parents of murdered teenager Angus Beaumont, speak to the media outside the Brisbane Supreme Court after the killers jailed for the murder appealed their sentences. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Tertius Pickard

“I think when it’s on film, and it’s obvious what’s happened … it’s so unnecessary and mentally it reminds you of the pain you went through at that point,” she said.

“It really shows more about their character that they chose to (appeal) it. They never have admitted any guilt.”

Mr Beaumont said it was “disgusting” that such serious offenders, now aged 16 and 17, couldn’t be named.

“Having to shut my mouth and not speak about who these animals are that killed my son … is disgusting,” he said

“If you’re going to be a violent serial offender, someone who kills people, you should be named, you should be named and shamed, everybody should know who’s living around us and for us to have to sit back and not name our offenders who killed our boy it’s a joke.”

Ms Liddle said the boy who was charged with murder as a party “was actually scarier” than the one who fatally stabbed her son.

“If you look at his offending history and his actions, he’s psychopathic, he’s dangerous.”

Ms Liddle said she couldn’t understand how her son’s killers “feel no compassion for a human life”.

“But that speaks volumes about where we are with our violent young offenders,” she said.

“I don’t understand how it’s been let go this far.

“Even us novices could see there were dangerous failings in the child welfare system, in our detention centres and how they’re run and the outcomes we receive on the other end where these kids are released – still violent, still unrehabilitated and it is a revolving door system we need to change that.

“We need a process where they are held accountable, that the actual sentence is applicable to the crime and meets the expectations of the public … but that term’s served with a real rehabilitation process running while they’re in detention not just sitting in there complaining they didn’t get pizza.

“We want to make sure they’re less dangerous when they walk out that door.”