Two teens found guilty of killing Angus Beaumont

Two teenagers have once again been found guilty of killing 15-year-old Angus Beaumont, with one convicted of murder and the other of manslaughter.

Angus Beaumont died after being stabbed during an altercation in Redcliffe in 2020. Picture: Supplied

Two teenagers have once again been found guilty of killing 15-year-old Angus Beaumont, with one convicted of murder and the other of manslaughter.

Angus’ distraught parents left the courtroom shortly after Justice Sean Cooper delivered his verdict on Thursday morning following a judge-alone retrial of the two defendants earlier this month.

Both killers were aged 14 when they instigated the attack on Angus who died after being stabbed in the heart in March 2020 at Redcliffe.

The now 17-year-old who delivered the fatal blow was found guilty of murder.

His co-offender, now aged 18, who also swung a knife at Angus during the altercation but missed, was found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

The two had previously been found guilty of murder at an earlier jury trial in 2022.

Michelle Liddle and Ben Beaumont, the parents of Angus Beaumont, have campaigned for stronger youth justice laws since their son’s death. Picture: Steve Pohlner

But in July this year, the Court of Appeal set aside their convictions and ordered a retrial, finding the trial judge’s failure to properly direct the jury about allegations the pair had slapped hands after Angus was stabbed had caused a miscarriage of justice.

The retrial in earlier this month heard on the night of the alleged murder, the defendants had purchased cannabis from one of Angus’ friends near the Redcliffe Skate Park and later returned to confront the seller.

The court heard Angus was wearing knuckle dusters on one hand at the time and had been given a knife by his friend, but it remained down by his side. He died in hospital soon after the attack.

Crown Prosecutor Chris Cook on Thursday submitted both teens should be resentenced as soon as possible.

However the court heard there would be further delays to allow time for pre-sentence and psychological reports to be prepared.

“(The older defendant) is 18 and a half and Youth Justice will not transfer him to an adult jail until his sentence so he will remain in juvenile detention until the sentence occurs so that’s now three months away, it will be getting towards his nineteenth birthday and he’ll remain in juvenile detention,” Mr Cook said.

“So the crown’s focus is on getting the sentence heard as quickly as possible ideally next month.”

Defence barristers Jacob Robson, for the defendant found guilty of manslaughter, agreed the sentence should take place as early as possible.

“I expect I’ll ultimately be making a submission that my client has done sufficient time given the amount of time he’s done on remand for this,” he said.

The sentence was listed for February 23 next year.

Angus’ parents Michelle Liddle and Ben Beaumont have campaigned for stronger youth justice laws in Queensland since the tragic death of their son.

Ms Liddle sobbed as the verdicts were delivered and the couple left the court a short time later.

Both defendants had extensive criminal histories prior to the altercation with Angus, including for offences of violence and knife crime.

In his published reasons, Justice Cooper said Angus’ friend had handed him a knife which he held in his right hand as the two defendants approached him on the night of his death.

He found Angus held the knife down by his side and took three steps toward the two, yelling loudly at them.

“I am satisfied that he yelled words intended to get the defendants to disengage from any further interactions with (his friend) and the rest of the group: words to the effect of “f*** off”,” Justice Cooper wrote.

He found Angus did not invite the defendants to fight him and that his demeanour and movements were consistent with him trying to get them to leave the scene.

“Bearing those things in mind and taking account of the defendants’ young age and lack of maturity, I nevertheless infer, from the fact that the defendants paused as they approached the entrance to the carpark, that they saw Angus was armed and recognised that they had a choice whether to continue to advance and engage with him,” Justice Cooper wrote.

“Rather than take the opportunity to disengage from further conflict and return to where (another boy) was waiting with the cannabis, the defendants instead chose to pull their knives out and to advance aggressively on Angus.

“Based on my viewing of the CCTV footage of the altercation, I find that it was the defendants’ advance towards Angus, after their brief pause, which instigated the fatal altercation. The defendants were the aggressors in that altercation.”

CCTV captured much of the incident, including the two boys slapping hands which was a point of controversy in the case, with the prosecution submitting it was evidence of them “congratulating” one another.

“I find that the actions of the defendants in touching hands were deliberate,” Justice Cooper said.

“However, I do not infer that, by this action, the defendants were congratulating each other for (one boy) having stabbed Angus.”

Justice Cooper found their actions were equally consistent with them confirming to each other that they were no injured in the “brief but violent fight”.

He found that Angus did not invite or challenge the defendants to a fight and that his actions did not amount to provocation.

The court found the teen who inflicted the fatal blow was not acting in self-defence and also had not established the partial defence of provocation.

Justice Cooper said he inferred from the facts that the older defendant was also armed with a knife and intended to engage in the fight with Angus while armed.

“I am therefore satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that, when (he) moved towards Angus and drew his attention away from (the older defendant), he intended to aid (him) in striking Angus with the knife and had actual knowledge that (he) intended to strike Angus with the knife,” the judge wrote.

“However, I am not persuaded that there is a sufficient basis to infer that (the older defendant) was aware (the other offender) would strike Angus in the chest using the force which he did or that, when he struck, (the co-offender) intended to at least do grievous bodily harm to Angus.

“I am not satisfied that the prosecution has excluded beyond a reasonable doubt the hypothesis that (the younger boy’s) decision to strike Angus in the chest with the force that he used was made spontaneously and without the actual knowledge of (his co-offender).”

Justice Cooper said he was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the older offender intended to help cause the death or cause grievous bodily harm.

“While I am not satisfied that the prosecution has established that (older offender) had actual knowledge that (younger offender) would strike Angus in the chest, I am satisfied it should have been apparent to (him) from the circumstances of the fight that a blow of that sort was likely to be struck,” he said.

“An ordinary 14-year-old boy would reasonably foresee Angus’ death to be the result of such a blow.

“Accordingly, I am satisfied that the prosecution has established beyond reasonable doubt that (the now 18-year-old) aided (now 17-year-old) in the unintentional killing of Angus and is guilty of manslaughter …”.