CCTV covered almost all available angles of the incident on May 23, but it could never show what was inside the 14-year-old defendant’s mind at the time.
It was that critical issue that was the subject of both Crown and defence closing addresses in the High Court at Dunedin yesterday.
Counsel Anne Stevens KC said her client had carried a knife in public after being the subject of a violent robbery in a Dunedin nine months earlier.
That also came against a background of bullying throughout his years at school; he had PTSD, ADHD and had no appreciation such a stabbing could be fatal, she said.
"Enere [Mclaren-Taana, the victim] knows he is taller, bigger, older; he’s got a distinct advantage.
"[The defendant] was a little boy in comparison — this is a lightweight versus a heavyweight," she told jurors.
"It was a David-and-Goliath situation.
"David did not have a slingshot, he had a knife."
But Crown prosecutor Richard Smith said the jury only had to view the footage to see the truth revealed.
The defendant was captured walking past Enere, who was standing at a bus stop, and briefly reacting to a comment made by the victim about his clothing.
Mr Smith said the CCTV clearly showed the younger boy had walked past the victim, but backtracked up to 20m to confront him.
"In real terms, that’s what kicked off the physical confrontation," the prosecutor said.
"If he was actually frightened of Enere, actually scared he was going to get the bash ... then he didn’t need to go back.
"He could’ve just kept walking.
"He could’ve gone into the police station.
When the pair met on the footpath, Enere adopted what appeared to be a fighting stance, sending the defendant into a retreat of five or six steps.
"You don’t do that if you’re the aggressor, do you? You do that if you’re scared," Mrs Stevens said.
The Crown, though, said the defendant’s comments to a psychiatrist in the month afterwards were telling.
He told Dr Maxwell Pankhurst Enere was "big, but not that big".
"I thought I could fight him."
The teenager pulled a bag from his shoulder forward, only removing the knife, the defence argued, at the request of the victim.
The weapon had scared off a potential assailant in the past and the boy hoped it would work again, Mrs Stevens said.
The defendant had earlier told the court he was initially planning to remove the bag in preparation for a fist fight, but Mr Smith cast doubt on that explanation.
Within seconds the knife was brandished — "no fear, no hesitation, just straight on the attack".
Moving backward, Enere aimed a kick at the teen’s head as the fight spilled on to the road.
The defendant missed once with the knife before a second effort caused the fatal wound.
The prosecution said the footage showed the teen chasing Enere for more than 12m into the middle of Great King St.
But Mrs Stevens said the pair were "fully engaged" in a fight and her client was not consciously pursuing the victim.
She underscored for the jury the age of her client — "a child in law and fact".
"That’s why we roll our eyes at teenage behaviour ... They do not think of consequences, they act on impulse," she said.
"[Teens] make decisions based on emotions, on fear, on terror."
Mr Smith, however, argued the defendant had adopted a "gangster persona" in the months leading up to the stabbing and was acting to avoid embarrassment and protect his new "tough-guy" image.
"Self-defence is about using reasonable force to defend yourself.
"It’s not about deciding to fight someone because they insulted you.
"It’s not about wanting to fight someone so you don’t appear a coward," he said.
To find the defendant guilty of murder the jury would have to accept he either intended to kill Enere, intended to cause bodily injury knowing his actions would likely result in death, or was reckless to the consequences and consciously ran the risk.
The jury continues its deliberations today.
