BBCA teenager has been sentenced to life imprisonment for murder at the age of 13 and told that he would serve at least eight and a half years behind bars.
The body of Jahjia Kok, who was stabbed in the stomach and chest, was responded to by an ambulance crew on August 29, in a house in Oldbury near Birmingham.
The trial was told in the Wolverhampton Crown Court that the defendant ran away from the fence to escape the scene and just caught in a friend’s house to play video games.
The teenager refused to murder, claiming that the wounds were not intentionally, but a jury returned a convict by a majority of 10 to two in April.
While sentenced on Friday, Mrs. Justice Tiples told the defendant that she was sure that she had “intended to kill” Jahjia after pushing or carrying the knife around her neck.
“When you killed Jahzia, he was only 13 years old and had a child with everything in life ahead of him. It was a bad and violent attack,” he said.
During the remarks he sentenced, the judge admitted that the weapon used in the murder was Jahjiah and was taken by his killer at a address in Oldbury, West Midlands in August.
The teenager cannot be identified after the judge pronounced the verdict that his welfare surpassed the public interest in giving him the name.
Emily Claver said from Crown Prosecution Service: “This is a deep sad case where Jahjia Cock lost his life and insensitively for knife violence to the whole future.”
He said that his family had to face “unimaginable pain and disadvantages”, while his killer would now face the results of his actions that would change the trajectory of his life “.
During the trial, the defendant told the jury that he was released after holding Jahzia’s hands, while being threatened with a knife, which he turned to the floor during an attempt to calm a argument about the “missing” volume of Canbis.
He also told the gamblers that he did not have a knife in his hands and dialed 999 to get paramedics, leaving the property only once when he believed that Jahjia was dead.
The judge admitted that no one was prepared, but ruled that the defendant was not acting in self -defense and that his actions were “faced with a potential threat” “completely out of proportion”.
