A woman and police officers all gave CPR as they battled to save Ryan Kirkpatrick‘s life after he was fatally stabbed in Carlisle.
Jurors at the city’s crown court heard more evidence today from people who were present at Carlyle’s Court, off Fisher Street, where 24-year-old Mr Kirkpatrick was attacked on the night of Saturday, 18th September last year.
Two men — Kane Hull, 29, and Liam Craig Porter, 33 — are on trial. They each deny charges of murder and manslaughter.
A statement from PC Anthony Cropley was read to the jury. He was on mobile patrol and overheard a call requesting an immediate response to a stabbing at Carlyle’s Court.
As PC Cropley arrived at Fisher Street, he saw a large group of people in the middle of the road. “As I have come into the courtyard I was met with a large group of persons in extreme distress — shouting, crying and angry,” stated the officer.
He saw a male covered in blood and lying motionless outside a hairdressers with a female carrying out CPR. As a colleague took over that resuscitation, PC Cropley tried to check the male’s pulse but did not get anything.
PC Cropley then took over CPR in two spells, either side of one from paramedics, and learned that the male was Mr Kirkpatrick. Paramedics and medics from a Great North Air Ambulance Service critical care team then took over Mr Kirkpatrick’s care.
“I have grabbed a blanket that was brought by a colleague and have used it as a shield,” stated PC Cropley, who was keen to screen the area from members of the public.
Doctors pronounced Mr Kirkpatrick deceased at the scene.
Hull, of no fixed address, and Porter, of Fulmar Place, Carlisle, admit they were present at Carlyle’s Court when an initial incident had occurred just after 8-30pm. But they deny being present when Mr Kirkpatrick was fatally attacked.
Forensic imagery analyst Clive Evans also gave evidence to the jury. He was asked to compare images of the physical features and clothing of both Hull and Porter during incident one, and those of two masked suspects — labelled subjects X and Y — in the courtyard at the time of the stabbing around 15 minutes later.
Mr Evans gave his opinion on similarities and differences as jurors looked at CCTV stills which captured incidents on the night.
Referring to his critical findings in a report, he concluded he could find “no irreconcilable differences” that would permit the elimination of Hull and Porter as “candidates for subjects X and Y”.
Mr Evans further concluded: “Overall, in my opinion, the imagery evidence lends weight to the contention that Mr Porter and subject Y are the same person, and that Mr Hull and subject X are the same person.”
The alternative scenario, he also stated, was that subjects X and Y were different people to Mr Porter and Mr Hull who are “coincidentally observed to associate themselves with each other” while exhibiting physical and clothing similarities.
The trial continues.
