Frances Gibb, Legal Editor
Take a trip to New York and see the city from the air
A schoolgirl faces a custodial sentence for filming a brutal and fatal attack on a mobile phone.
The conviction was described as a legal landmark yesterday because it is thought to be the first successful prosecution of someone who filmed a “happy-slapping” attack but did not also take part physically.
The 15-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the manslaughter of Gavin Waterhouse last September when she filmed the attack on a mobile phone.
The Crown Prosecution Service described the prosecution as bold. It is intended to send a message to youths involved in the growing trend for happy slapping.
The girl admitted filming an attack on Mr Waterhouse, 29, of Keighley, West Yorkshire, in which he was punched and kicked. He died of a ruptured spleen. She has already been sent to a secure unit and will be sentenced at a later date. In theory she faces the same maximum sentence as for the offence that she aided and abetted – which is life in this case – although that is unlikely.
Judith Naylor, the Crown advocate with West Yorkshire Crown Prosecution Service and junior counsel in the case, said: “This is believed to be the first time a suspect in England and Wales has been successfully prosecuted for aiding and abetting murder or manslaughter, for the filming of an inaptly called happy-slapping incident.”
She said that the CPS had made a landmark decision in advising that the girl be charged.
Ms Naylor said: “We have seen and heard of many instances in recent months and years where youths have been encouraged by their peers to attack innocent people without words ever having been used. The message is this: if you stand by and watch your friends committing brutal crimes and video-record their acts for yours or others’ amusement your actions will not be ignored by the law enforcement agencies and prosecution may follow.”
Grahame Stowe, a criminal lawyer with Grahame Stowe Bateson, a law firm in Yorkshire, said: “More than ever before young people are turning to extreme violence, in some cases for no reason other than entertainment. This case illustrates once again the gross callousness some teenagers are capable of.” He added that it was a bold move to prosecute someone “who, in a literal sense, does not have blood on his or her hands”. He said: “The principle that videoing a criminal offence taking place can be considered aided and abetting could have some serious ramifications.”
The girl was accused alongside Mark Masters, 19, and a 17-year-old youth, who cannot be named for legal reasons, who pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing at Leeds Crown Court to the manslaughter of Mr Waterhouse. On Wednesday she pleaded guilty at the same court to aiding and abetting, counselling and procuring the unlawful killing.
Judge James Stewart, QC, remanded the girl to Newton Aycliffe secure unit while reports are prepared on her. She will be sentenced with Masters and the other youth at a later date.
Mr Waterhouse was found dead at his flat after being injured in the violent assault. A postmortem examination showed that his death was due to internal injuries and that he had suffered a ruptured spleen.
Tom Bayliss, QC, for the prosecution, said that the teenager had filmed about 15 seconds of violence – an attack that included punches and kicks to the victim. The three ran off and one witness described the two males laughing about what happened. The girl did not know Masters and the other youth before the incident but continued to associate with them afterwards.
The footage of the violence was later shown to others even after it was known that Mr Waterhouse had died, although the earlier hearing was told that the recording no longer existed.
Detective Superintendent Paul Kennedy, of West Yorkshire Police, said: “We are pleased with the outcome of this police investigation following what was an unprovoked and cowardly attack.”
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles


Overseas contacts and local business information

A treasure trove of baubles, booty and stylish quests

Dubrovnik, the Dalmatian Coast and Montenegro

£129,500
Bentley Edinburgh
£79,850
Mercedes-Benz of Northampton
£26,995
Unit 1, Woodfield Business Unit, Kidderminster Road, Ombersley, Worcester.
Great car insurance deals online
90k + Bonus + Options
Confidential
London
£23,716 +
Highways Agency
National
£
£43,405 - £48,228 pa
Notting Hill Housing
London
£30,000 base, £100,000 OTE
Riches Consulting
London/South
Live in One of London's Most Vibrant Areas
From £249,950
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
The people supporting this verdict are idiots.
It's understandable if it's illegal to assist or to encourage somebody to commit a crime. What I don't understand is how you can be arrested just for nothing more than videotaping a crime occurring and displaying it to the public (even if you laughed about it), or for not stepping in to help the victim. This girl may be a heartless amoral bitch, but she did nothing to cause the victim's injuries and thus doesn't deserve a criminal penalty. Legally, she should be considered nothing more than a witness to a crime. Sure, her friend may be a murderer, but in a free country each individual is held responsible for his own actions and there is simply no such thing as "guilt by association".
Louis, NYC, USA / New York
Craig, cambs, is correct.. To what extent, if any, a viewer is complicit in the commission of a crime needs to be determined far more rigorously than this, irrespective of whether there is filming involved.
The same applies to the possession or viewing of any resulting images.
What would the sentence have been in the present case if the filming had been done by the BBC? And who exactly would have been prosecuted?
The girl's lawyers should consider taking this case to the Court of Appeal with a view to clarifying these points and ensuring that justice can be seen to be done.
Dave, Southampton, UK
I wish the death sentence was legal in this country !!
T45ha, England,
This is a girl that has been the witness and subject to violence in the care of her mother, who left the girl alone the night before this happened. She had a good solicitor and mother telling her to stay silent, this really helped her. her mother should be brought to justice for how she treated thid kid long before this occurred. Yes, the system failed to help this kid who constantly ran from home, but she had no homelife. I know that the girl now has schooling and been looked after, so any custodial sentence she is given I can only see as a blessing, they will be somebody there for her now. Lets hear all the full facts of her life before judging her and it was not her phone, one of the boys in question took it back. The crime here is bad adult advice for which she will pay the price for her silence she was advised to give no comment. The solicitor and & her mother should bear the consequences of their actions, she made the mistake of listening to and trusting them.
Mary, Ronchamp, France
Why not give her life. Now, that would be a deterrent to the other children who want to continue the same stupidity.
Rich, San Angelo, USA
Well done the CPS, at last a stand has been made against the decay that has set into society.
C. Thomas, UK,
This was a brutal attack. "Happy slapping" is a wholly inappropriate term. Has anyone ver been happy to be slapped.
Paul T, Cardiff,
In this case morally it may seem right to sentence her although all she did was film.
But part of the fundamental basis of our legal system is that if you don't actually aid or commit the crime you can't be prosecuted for it, this sets a dangerous precedent.
At what point does doing nothing become aiding? Is it when your recording? When your standing watching? Seeing and not calling the police? Before this ruling the line was distinct this only goes to blur it. Although I cant say I like the character of anyone wo would do this it shouldn't be illegal.
Craig, cambs,
"this prosecution will make it unlikely that crimes will be recorded by anyone in the future"
Nonsense. This girl filmed the attack, allowed people to view the footage, and became friends with the attackers. Had she filmed it as a passer by and handed the footage over to the police instead, she wouldn't be looking at a custodial sentence. It's fear mongering like yours that makes some people not want to get involved.
Steve B, UK,
Well Heinz if these people weren't so thick they wouldn't do it in the first place. There will be plenty of evidence of these crimes and the only madness will be if every single person who is involved in theses crimes isn't jailed for at least 20 years and no arguments about rights. When you take part in these things you cease to have human rights.
John Sinclair, Dundee, UK
A good move. Perhaps the internet crimes unit (or whatever it's called) should spend some time going through YouTube and persuing the people that have posted videos of assaults there.
W Smith, Manchester,
This could also set a useful precedent in apportioning blame to the parents of such youths. If it can be seen that merely recording the crime is an accessory; then surely some action could be taken against the parents for letting their psychopathic children out into the general public.
TG, Plymouth,
another example of state police posturing as thought police, this prosecution will make it unlikely that crimes will be recorded by anyone in the future. Criminals rejoice, there will be less evidence against you!!
Heinz Geyer, London,
These youths know full well what they are doing and the conviction and sentence should reflect this fact. It is only Lawyers and Barristers who dream up some of the implausible excuses and reasons why these criminals should be kept out of custody as they have shown remorse or some form of reaction to what they did.
They would be better convincing the general public on planet earth that pigs do fly.
keithw, Wirral, UK