The jury in the David Read murder trial has been told in order to convict the accused, they must be absolutely sure, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the 50-year-old was murdered by Mohammed Ali Khan.

At Preston Crown Court on Friday, prosecution and defence barristers in the Blackburn murder trial gave their closing speeches to the jury, following three days of evidence.  

Mohammed Ali Khan is accused of murdering "gentle giant" David Read at his home in Leamington Road, on June 7, which he denies.

When the trial opened on Monday, the jury were told David Read was a vulnerable man who was known to Khan, 34, of Preston New Road, and had allegedly stolen £700 worth of drugs from the defendant.

The jury were also told Khan, a drug dealer, had allegedly killed Mr Read in the early hours of June 7 with a hammer and pair of scissors.

The prosecution said he then later tried to cover up his crimes by changing his clothes and discarding items, including Mr Read’s mobile phone, his own blood-stained clothes and trainers, and a hammer.

Mr Read, 50, was found dead in his flat by his mother, Mary Read, at around 11.20am on June 7.

Khan was arrested on June 9 and charged with Mr Read’s murder on June 12.

Closing for the prosecution, Jaime Hamilton KC said: “Anyone who caused the injuries to David Read, must in my submission, have intended to cause him at least serious harm.

“These involved repeated blows with a pair of scissors, blows that rained down on his skill, his arms and hands.

“Blows that caused so many lacerations that the pathologist stopped counting.

“Blows with such force that they penetrated his buttocks, blows that caused indentations in his skull.

“Blows with a hammer that broke bones and caused bleeding on the brain.

“Blows that led the pathologist to describe the attack as forceful and sustained.

“Even if you were for one minute to entertain the fanciful notion this was self-defence, at which point would even the most violent of attackers been subdued?

“Even if every single word of the defendant is true, this would still be murder, but of course his words are not true.

“The defendant has lied to you about his self-defence injuries, he had a smattering of injuries seen by the police, caused by the police when taken to the ground while they were arresting him.

“The defendant knows full well having had time to think, it would have been ludicrous to think that he attacked a man and that attack not having left a mark upon him, so he lied.

“If he’s not telling you the truth about what happened in that flat, that an unlawful assault caused the death of David Read, if there was a grain of truth in his account, not only would he have said it in his interview, but he would have said it to his sister.

“Three times he spoke to his sister and not once, not once did he say, ‘all I was doing was defending myself’.

“The defendant tried to cover his tracks, washing the blood from his hands in the bathroom and kitchen, smashing David Read’s phone, deleting David Read’s number from his own phone, trying to get rid of the hammer.

“If he had been in a life-threatening situation, with a man that would not stop coming at him, would he think after securing his escape, ‘now I will wash my hands and gather my belongings’?

“Is that the behaviour of someone who’s in panic or is that the behaviour of someone who’s just taken someone else’s life in a prolonged, sustained, and violent assault?

“This murder did not come from nowhere, it’s a mix of drug intoxication, aggression, and a belief, mistaken or otherwise that £700 worth of stuff had been stolen and that was the catalyst for extreme violence.

“The Crown say this was not self-defence, it’s nothing other than a ferocious attack designed to cause maximum damage.

“With that length of ferocity he intended to kill.”

Closing for the defence, Lee Karu KC said: “People involved in drugs, life having not gone the way it ought to have, it’s a tragedy, I make no bones about that. A person’s family is devastated.

“But the defendant’s family no doubt is just as devastated.

“The reason I mention that is that these are powerful emotions. You have seen and heard evidence of the sort that you don’t come across in normal life, it’s only on TV and in the cinema.

“It’s quite normal for you to have a lot of sympathy for a man you know is vulnerable. He was vulnerable because of his addiction and his mental health.

“But you as the jury would be deciding this case on the basis of emotions and as soon as you allow that to happen justice will not be done.

“It’s the evidence that you have to conclude on, what you have been told and of course what the defendant said in evidence.

“You must put it all together and see how it fits.

“It’s for the prosecution to prove this case, it’s never for a defendant to disprove it or to prove his innocence.

“The prosecution say he stole £700 of stuff from him and that’s why he did it, but what evidence was there to say that was the reason?

“If you fear for your life what is self-defence? You think he’s going to kill you, you kill him, you can’t go over the top.

“Can the Crown disprove that this defendant did not fear for his life?

“If you think your life is going to leave you because of an attack, you defend, you defend fully to the same extent.

“He cleaned his hands, he gets rid of his clothes, he wanders off. This man when he says he’s confused and in a panic and scared, is that not what someone would do, is that not possible?

“Can you imagine if a man is dead or injured, what would you do?

“Try and hide the evidence, not because you murdered a man, but because you killed a man. Killing is bad enough, you would try and hide the evidence and anything that points the finger at you.

“Don’t be fooled by this factor that when he’s speaking to his sister, he doesn’t mention this or say ‘it’s not my fault’.

“Just because he’s not saying these things to his sister, doesn’t make him guilty.

“This should never have happened but it did, that doesn’t make him guilty of murder.

“So when you look at the evidence, can the prosecution disprove self-defence? They can’t.

“If you are to look at all the evidence, then doubt wins.

“He is in your hands.”

Judge Graham Knowles KC will sum up the case for the jury on Monday morning, before they are sent out to consider their verdict. 

The trial continues.