A CHILLING account of a teenage gang's behaviour on the night of a brutal murder was given to a court.
A 16-year-old girl told Leeds Crown Court how the six youths had chatted and boasted about the attack which killed father of three Mohammad Parvaiz in Golcar.
She said one joked: "He's at least going to be on a life-support machine."
And she also recounted how some of the gang were "excited" after their fatal attack.
The teenager's evidence came on the 10th day of a trial. Michael Hand, 19, Christopher Murphy, 18, Graeme Slavin, 18, two 17-year-olds and a 16-year-old all deny murdering Mr Parvaiz, 42. He was a taxi driver attacked and beaten in Field Head, Golcar, last July.
'Boasts of killer' claim in cabbie murder case
A COURT heard about a young man's boasts after a fatal attack.
"He's at least going to be on a life-support machine" was the claim said to have been made by Michael Hand after Huddersfield cabbie Mohammad Parvaiz was kicked and beaten to death in Golcar.
A 16-year-old girl told a Leeds Crown Court jury how Hand, 19, spoke about the 42-year-old Lockwood Taxis driver after their group of friends fled the scene of the attack at Field Head.
Hand, Christopher Murphy, 18, Graeme Slavin, 18, two 17-year-olds and a 16-year-old are all on trial for the murder of the Birkby father-of-three.
The girl, who cannot be named, said: "He said: 'I reckon he's at least going to be on a life-support machine. Life-support's not that bad. I've been on it before."
Giving evidence for the prosecution she described what happened after the attack on the night of July 22.
She and a group of friends had gathered with the defendants earlier that evening in a park nearby.
They had stopped behind the defendants during the attack and were caught up by them after they walked away from the crime scene.
She said: "We asked them what they'd done and I thought: 'I need to go home'. They said: 'Just walk down (the road). You were there so you need to walk with us'.
"I was with the lads earlier and I knew that they were going to get done for this. I thought I was going to get blamed as well because I was with them."
The teenager said she asked them what they had done. She said she saw Murphy showing off the driver's watch.
She said: "Murphy said: 'He tried really hard to keep his watch on, but I managed to get it off'."
She said Hand later got hold of the watch and flung it into some bushes.
She testified that some of the boys were talking about the attack. She heard Hand say he was the first to hit Mr Parvaiz and that he had kicked him twice in the head and hit him there with an object.
She said Slavin had punched Mr Parvaiz and his hand was swollen. The witness heard the defendants joking about one of their gang, a 17-year-old, not doing anything that bad.
She added: "Mikey (Hand) didn't seem bothered; he was quite excited. Murphy was quite excited."
She observed that the two 17-year-olds were quiet and Slavin looked worried. She said Hand told her he probably had blood on his shoes.
The witness said the group dispersed when they saw a helicopter fly over.
She walked with Slavin and Hand to one of the 17-year-old's homes, intending to call for a taxi to take her home.
She said the defendants wanted the group to split up, as this looked less suspicious.
The teenager said Slavin got changed, possibly changing just his top.
She said: "Mikey let the police in. Graeme was sat down in the living room, acting as if nothing had happened.
"Ten or 15 minutes later the two 17-year-olds arrived. Some time after that we were all arrested."
The girl said she did not call the police after the attack because she thought the police would 'go mad' at them.
She told the defence that as she walked with them Hand and Slavin appeared "quite smug; they thought they'd got away with it".
Earlier yesterday a 17-year-old girl who had called Lockwood Taxis on the night seemed distressed when she was cross-examined by the defence.
David Nathan QC, for one of the 17-year-olds, said: "If it hadn't been for you that cab would have never turned up, would it?"
She replied: "I don't know".
He accused her of remembering some details of what happened only after a phone conversation with another female witness.
He said: "Because you spoke to your friend after she gave evidence you decided to back her up. It simply isn't true that my client had blood on his shoe, is it?" The witness said that it was.
The trial continues.