Trial of Lawrence Manning Snr and Jnr nears end as closing arguments begin in King's Lynn court following Tilney All Saints incident
Prosecutors compared two defendants to children "caught with their hand in the cookie jar with chocolate on their fingers" - but defence barristers argued that lying witnesses prove their innocence.
The trial of Lawrence David Manning, 50, of Seadyke Bank in Wisbech, and his son Lawrence Manning, 26, of Garden Lane, Wisbech continued yesterday (Thursday).
It relates to an incident in Tilney All Saints on August 16 which involved a HGV being driven into a Glebe Estate property, a man being hospitalised with injuries and petrol bombs being thrown.
Manning Snr has pleaded not guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent, having an offensive weapon, and dangerous driving.
Manning Jnr has pleaded not guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent and damaging property being reckless as to whether life is endangered, and entered a guilty plea to causing criminal damage.
The trial's final evidence was put forward yesterday, with Manning Jnr's rolling over from Wednesday before his father took to the stand.
Manning Snr echoed a number of his son's claims regarding the day of the incident. He confirmed his relationship with his partner, who owns the Glebe Estate property, ended on that day.
He also backed up the fact that, prior to the incident, he had discovered a number of vehicles belonging to him had been damaged. He believes the family of his ex-partner was involved in this.
During a police interview in the days following the Tilney All Saints incident, Manning Snr originally told police he had only reversed his blue truck into the Glebe Estate house on one occasion.
However, CCTV footage shown throughout the trial has shown him to have done so twice.
He said he could not remember reversing into the property for a second time due to banging his head during the first occasion, repeatedly describing his state as "hazy".
His defence barrister, a Mr Norris, also drew attention to a stroke Manning Snr suffered in 2017 which reportedly affected his memory.
Manning Snr then described his role in a fight between his son and another man, Sean Manning, who appeared as a witness last week.
Manning Snr told jurors he was drawn to the scene by the sound of his son’s screams.
He said: “The two people on the road, whoever was on top of him, was trying to kill him. He was screaming for his life.
“I tried using my hands and feet to separate them and it wasn’t working.”
Manning Snr said he then grabbed something that looked like a “lump of wood” which resembled a pickaxe. His defence barrister, a Mr Norris, said he wanted to be “absolutely clear” that it was not a scythe.
“I hit him in the back of the legs,” Manning Snr said. “I didn’t want to hurt him, I just wanted him to let go.
“I could have hit him anywhere. I didn’t want to kill him. I just wanted to hurt him so he would let my son go.
“I am sorry that he has got hurt, but being a parent it was either my boy or him.”
He confirmed in court that he had taken the instrument used to strike Sean Manning home after the August 16 incident and stored it in a shed. Asked why he had not informed police, who were searching for it, of this, he said he had not been asked to.
Manning Snr insisted the instrument had not been a scythe, and said it was a form of pickaxe with a “metal sleeve” rather than a blade.
Barristers then began their closing arguments in the case, with crown prosecutor Simon Connolly up first.
On the defendants' "carefully considered explanation as to why they are there" at Glebe Estate, he said: "Is that really the background to what happened? You can see how it starts and the violence erupts."
On Manning Snr's driving, Mr Connolly added: "What on earth was he making that particular manoeuvre for?
"Like a kid caught with his hand in a cookie jar with chocolate on his fingers, he has been caught red handed.
"We are expected to drive as confident and careful drivers. He is trying to call together an excuse as to why he may have done it."
Mr Connolly also re-visited what he called a "football kick to Sean Manning's head".
The prosecutor concluded: "It is obvious that these two men went to that estate looking for trouble.
"They started it and they finished it.
"It is not a surprise there was some reaction with fire bombs.
"We say that on all of these counts, both defendants are guilty."
However, Stephen Mather, Manning Jnr's defence barrister, insisted that gaps in Sean Manning's testimony highlighted significant doubt in the prosecution case.
He said: "I suggest that Sean Manning has lied on more than one occasion and about more than one thing."
These lies, Mr Mather said, included telling jurors under oath that Manning Jnr had a scythe at the scene despite CCTV footage showing evidence to the contrary.
The barrister said it also extended to inaccuracies regarding who the ownership of a number of vehicles which in fact belonged to Manning Snr.
Mr Mather said this was easily proven by the lack of criminal damage charges brought against either defendant, as individuals cannot be prosecuted for damaging their own property.
On the altercation between his client and Sean Manning, Mr Mather added: "He (Manning Jnr) thought he was being killed. When you are in that situation, if you have ever been in a situation, you don't have time to think. You react."
He concluded: "I ask you to consider what he said and I ask you to find him not guilty on both counts."
Mr Norris is set to give his concluding argument for Manning Snr this morning (Friday) before the judge sums up the case.
