The boys, who are now 13, were roaming the streets of Wolverhampton when they confronted Shawn Seesahai, 19, and his friend on the Stowlawn playing fields last November 13.
His friend fled but Shawn fell to the floor where he was punched, kicked, stamped on and ‘chopped’ at with the 42.5cm-long blade, with one blow piercing his heart.
The pair are believed to be the youngest defendants convicted of murder in Britain since Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, both then aged 11, were found guilty in 1993 of killing two-year-old James Bulger.
Prosecutor Michelle Heeley KC told the court on Thursday they were ‘the youngest knife murderers’ and there was ‘little precedent’ when it comes to passing sentence.
The judge, Mrs Justice Tipples – who earlier rejected a media application to name the killers – handed each of them a life sentence with a minimum term of eight years and six months at Nottingham Crown Court today.
She told the boys: ‘When you killed Shawn he was 19, starting out in his adult life with everything to live for.
‘His parents have lost their son. His sister has lost her brother. What you did is horrific and shocking.
‘You did not know Shawn, he was a stranger to you. You both killed Shawn in an attack that lasted less than a minute when he asked you to move (from a bench).
‘I am sure you intended to kill him.’
Shawn’s relatives, who were forced to take out a loan to travel to the UK to view the 20-day trial, watched the sentencing hearing via a videolink.
In a statement, they said his murder had been ‘tragic, unexpected and senseless’.
They went on: ‘As a family we are struggling in so many ways since Shawn was taken from us, especially in the horrific way in which he was taken.
‘Losing a child is a parent’s worst nightmare. To put it all down in a statement on how it has impacted our lives would take more than a day to read.
‘It has left a huge hole in the pit of our stomach which nothing can fill, we are devastated as a family, totally heartbroken and confused.’
The family members, including parents Suresh and Maneshwary and sister Shana, added: ‘Mentally it has been hard for any of us to function normally. None of us have had an unbroken night’s sleep since Shawn was taken from us.
‘Every time I close my eyes all I can think about are what his last moments were and how scared he must have been. It continually breaks my heart.
Why can’t the killers be named?
The killers are thought to be the youngest convicted of murder in Britain since Robert Thompson and Jon Venables.
But while those two were named, the two 13-year-olds who stabbed Shawn Seesahai – three years older than Thompson and Venables – cannot be.
Several media organisations argued they should be stripped of the anonymity granted them by an order under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act.
Jude Bunting KC, representing three of the media organisations, told the court: ‘This point is squarely present in this case, which has attracted local concern and national revulsion.
‘We are in the realm of knife crime, which is an issue of substantial public interest.’
Naming the boys would also enable the media to investigate the possibility of institutional failures, Mr Bunting asserted.
But Mrs Justice Tipples said she had accepted evidence contained in pre-sentence reports that naming the boys would have a detrimental impact on their welfare.
The judge told the court the facts of the killing – which ‘took place in not much more than a minute’ – were ‘of course shocking, particularly given the very young age of the defendants’.
However, she accepted evidence from social workers that one of the defendants was vulnerable, had ‘extremely complex needs’ and that identifying him would have ‘an extremely detrimental impact on his mental health’.
The judge also accepted a statement in a pre-sentence report which said naming the other youth was likely to increase the likelihood of negative attention behind bars.
‘The impact on us as a family is devastating, its hard to believe that we will ever come to terms with what has happened.
‘We will never get to see Shawn get married or have a family of his own. These things have been taken from us for what appears to be no reason at all.’
Prosecutor Michelle Heeley KC submitted that the case was aggravated by the fact that one of the defendants had admitted he ‘regularly’ carried the machete, and that fact that two offenders had jointly attacked one victim.
One of the boys admitted possession of the knife prior to the trial, while the other was found guilty of the same charge when they were both unanimously convicted of murder on June 10.
Both boys claimed the other had inflicted four wounds with the machete, after a dispute about sitting on a park bench.
Rachel Brand KC, defending the boy who admitted buying the machete for £40, told the court during mitigation: ‘He lacked, as a child, foresight of the consequences of his actions, and lacked, as a child, the ability to regulate his behaviour in the same way adults do.’
Urging the court to take into account the fact the boy had been ‘groomed’ and exploited by older youths and young men in the wider community, Ms Brand added: ‘We say the evidence shows that his involvement was with his fists and feet and the co-defendant wielded the machete.
‘He knows that he bears the responsibility for taking that machete to the scene.
‘All he can do as a child struggling to express himself about what has happened is to say to the Youth Offending Team that he wishes he hadn’t taken the machete out with him.
‘He wishes they hadn’t gone to the park. He wishes that this hadn’t happened.’
Paul Lewis KC, defending the other boy, said: ‘The prospects of rehabilitation in his case, we submit, are excellent.
‘He had never been involved in any sort of criminality before. This was a one-off incident that was not premeditated – over in seconds – with admittedly tragic results.’
A Crown Prosecution Service spokesman said the two killers ‘should have been enjoying their childhood rather than arming themselves with a machete and killing an innocent person’.
Jonathan Roe said: ‘As prosecutors, we often deal with harrowing cases, but this case is particularly distressing due to the complete senselessness and devastating consequences of the defendants’ actions.
‘The defendants at the age of 12 should have been enjoying their childhood rather than arming themselves with a machete and killing an innocent person.
‘Shawn Seesahai lost his life in a horrifically cruel way.
‘I hope today’s sentencing serves as a reminder of the dangers of carrying machetes.
‘Shawn’s family have shown remarkable strength and dignity in the aftermath of such a tragedy and our thoughts are with them at this difficult time.’
.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.