THE TRIAL of the two teenagers accused of murdering Olly Stephens almost collapsed after lawyers for one of the boys demanded the Judge handling the case step down.

This came after a number of incidents involving Judge Heather Norton which the defence suggested constituted the use of ‘improper language’ and ‘inappropriate conduct bordering on hostility’.

These incidents, which the defence claimed demonstrated ‘bias’ from the Judge, included:

  • An email sent from the Judge to Timothy Raggatt QC, defending, and others included a note from the former which read: ‘what the f*** are you on about?’ in an application to summon a witness to court
  • The exclusion from the courtroom of Heather Howe, who was another solicitor for the younger defendant

Initially, Ms Howe was not allocated a seat in the courtroom because social distancing prevented her from being afforded a seat.

READ MORE: Reaction and updates after teenagers found guilty of murdering Olly Stephens

The younger defendant had two solicitors with him in the courtroom through the start of the trial.

When he took to the witness box to give evidence, Ms Howe requested she be allocated his seat in the courtroom.

In a ruling, the Judge said: “I responded in what I fully accept was an intemperate and inappropriate manner. I expressed concerns about the proposed changes to personnel in the courtroom, queried why the application was being made, and made comments about Mrs Howe’s professionalism. I initially refused the application.”

She then changed her mind, however, and apologised to Ms Howe the next day, who took the defendant’s seat.

READ MORE: Full story after boys found guilty of murdering Olly Stephens

Following this, Mr Raggatt submitted to the judge an application to summon the evidence of a doctor.

The Judge claimed there were ‘significant flaws’ in his submissions to bring the evidence to court, and refused an initial application before issuing a summons to bring an expert witness to court.

While deciding on these matters, the Judge made notes on Mr Raggatt’s application which were meant for herself.

At one point, she noted: ‘what the f*** are you going on about’, which reflected her ‘inability to follow the argument that Mr Raggatt was making at that particular time.’

She then sent what she thought was her ruling to the barristers involved in the case, but had in fact attached her notes, which included the ‘what the f***…’ phrase.

READ MORE: Police video shows key locations in area where Olly Stephens died

Commenting on this, the judge said: “It was deeply unfortunate that this note was sent to the parties; it was wholly unintentional and should not have happened.”

However, neither of these incidents demonstrated bias, the Judge claimed.

In deciding whether to recuse herself following the application from Mr Raggatt, she said: “Were I to accede to this application, the trial of these 2 young people which – so far as they and the jury are concerned has proceeded as expected – would have to be aborted and a re-trial arranged at some date in the future with all the inconvenience, anxiety and concern that that would inevitably have for all 3 defendants and for Olly’s family.

“Save for the single occasion in which, in the absence of the jury, I passed a remark on Mrs Howe’s professionalism, which I accept, and accepted at the time should not have been made and took steps to redress – I refute the criticisms made by Mr Raggatt in his application.

READ MORE: Doorstep footage shows Olly Stephens in final moments before fatal stabbing

“I do not accept that I have been biased – either overtly or implicitly; I do not agree that a fair-minded and informed observer in possession of the facts would have a perception that I have been biased. [The] trial has been conducted fairly by all parties, including me.

“Neither the fact that Mrs Howe has been unable to access the courtroom for reasons of space, and /or the fact that I have ruled against the defence on a matter of law give rise to proper grounds for me to recuse myself.”

The application to recuse Judge Norton played out on Wednesday, July 14, before the trial proceeded.

It concluded on Monday, July 26 when the jury found both boys guilty of murdering Olly Stephens.

READ MORE: Videos of knives appeared on boy's phone day before Olly Stephens was stabbed

Reading Crown Court previously heard that Olly was convinced to go to the park by a 14-year-old girl, where he was then “ambushed” by the two boys and stabbed to death.

The court heard both of the male attackers had “grievances” with Olly, while the girl is said to have described any violence against him as “karma” in the run-up to his death.

The younger boy, who was 13 at the time, used a knife to stab Olly while the older boy was fighting with him, the court previously heard.

We've set up a new Facebook group where you can find all the most interesting court and crime stories from around Berkshire.

Click the link above to join.