A plastic surgeon broke into a colleague’s home and doused the floor with a “highly flammable liquid” before stabbing him, a trial has heard.
Jonathan Peter Brooks is accused of assaulting his colleague Graeme Perks at his home in Haarlem, Nottinghamshire, on January 14, 2021.
The trial, at a court in Loughborough, heard that Dr Brooks “hated” Mr Perks because he was a witness in the disciplinary hearing against her.
The 61-year-old denies two counts of attempted murder, one count of attempted arson with intent to endanger life and one count of possession of a knife.
The court heard that despite being a surgeon, the defendant went against convention by being referred to as Dr Brooks. He is a consultant surgeon specialising in burns and plastic surgery and a colleague of Mr Perks.
In his opening statement to the prosecution, Tracey Ayling QC said Brooks left her home on her bicycle “in the early hours of a cold and snowy morning” and went to the residence of a colleague.
“The defendant was wearing a full camouflage jacket, trousers and a hat,” she said.
“He was wearing a headlamp and riding his bike with a crowbar, cans of petrol, matches and a knife.”
‘It is the Crown’s view that his intention was to break into Mr Perks’ home, set fire to it and, if necessary, stab Mr Perks.’
‘In short, he intended to kill Mr Perks in one or both of these ways.’
Ms Ayling said Mr Perks was woken by the sound of the defendant breaking in from the greenhouse and initially mistook him for his son.
She said Dr Brooks stabbed him in the stomach and had previously splashed liquid throughout the first floor of the house before “running away”.
Mr Perks’ wife and son “raised the alarm” after being woken and he was taken to hospital where he underwent surgery before being discharged more than a month later.
Ms Ayling said: “Due to his quick action and excellent surgical skills, Perks survived first.”
The jury heard that the victim had to undergo three operations before he was transferred to intensive care, had incision injuries to his liver and pancreas and was in a drug-induced coma. The court also heard that disciplinary proceedings against Dr Brooks had been conducted through an online hearing in the days before, during the coronavirus lockdown.
It was mentioned at the trial that Mr Perks’ statements were part of the evidence against Dr Brooks.
Ms Ayling said the defendant was “clearly frustrated” by the hearings and wanted his colleague to “disappear”.
“There is no need for the prosecution to prove any motive, however, it is clear that the defendant hated Graeme Perks,” she said.
At around 8.05am GMT on 14 January, Dr Brooks was found sleeping on a bench on the terrace outside a house in Southwell and an ambulance was called.
Ms Ayling said he was reported missing to police later that morning after his wife “reported finding some blood in their garage”.
He was later found at King’s Mill Hospital “being treated for hypothermia and injuries to his right hand.”
He was arrested a short time later and his clothes and a black backpack were analyzed. Ms Ayling said forensic evidence showed flammable liquids had been “splashed on the stairs, in the foyer and in the greenhouse”, which she believed indicated the defendant’s motive.
“It was in the middle of the night and the only way out for people sleeping upstairs was the stairs,” she said.
“The intention was definitely to kill the occupants of the house and to prevent them from escaping.”
The jury heard a recording of a 999 call made to police by Mr Perks’ son, in which he said: “He’s been stabbed at home. We need the police involved. There’s an intruder in the house.”
The court was also shown law enforcement camera footage of the victim receiving medical attention near the bottom of the stairs.
At the beginning of the trial, Judge Edward Pepperall addressed the jury about the absence of the defendants and their lawyers representing them.
He told the jury not to “speculate on the reasons for Dr. Brooks’s absence,” noting that he had been offered the opportunity to be represented.
“The combination of these conditions is very rare,” he said.
“His absence cannot be used as evidence against him.”
The trial, which is expected to last 14 weeks, continues.
You Might Be Interested In:
