Downpatrick man jailed for killing of Tattoo artist Aidan Mann

A man has been given an in indeterminate custodial sentence to serve a minimum nine years in prison for the killing of a popular tattoo artist.

Barry Donnelly, formerly of Church Street in Downpatrick, admitted manslaughter of Aidan Mann in Downpatrick in last year.

Mr Mann, 28, also known as Zen Black, died after being stabbed 14 times in broad daylight on Church Street in Downpatrick on 3 January.

Donnelly, 38, who is currently housed in a secure unit at Knockbracken Healthcare Park, denied murdering Mr Mann but had pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility and to possessing two large kitchen knives on the same date.

He had also pleaded guilty to three other charges arising from an unassociated incident.

Police thanked the public who ran to Aiden’s assistance, and who phoned emergency services. They also acknowledged the efforts of paramedics who tried to save Aiden’s life.

“This senseless attack has taken a young person’s life," a statement said.

"There are no words that can undo the tragic events of that morning. There’s nothing that can ease the pain and sadness of those who knew and loved Aiden, and our thoughts are very much with them today.”

The attack on was captured on CCTV. In it Aidan Mann is seen coming out of the flats were he and Donnelly lived .

The footage showed the defendant following and chasing the victim who was unable to escape and fell or was knocked to the ground.

The defendant straddled him and stabbed him repeatedly.

Members of the public pulled Donnelly off Mr Mann and restrained him until the police arrived.

The court said that the deceased was an entirely innocent victim who did nothing to provoke or justify the fatal attack by the defendant.

The deceased and the defendant had no contact by phone, text or social media although over the previous few days the defendant had complained a number of times to the police about the deceased, but the police entry suggested that the defendant was viewed as “a bit paranoid”.

The deceased had sent messages to friends that he was afraid to leave his home because of the defendant who, he believed, wanted to start a fight. During police interviews the defendant did not deny what he had done but suggested he was carrying the knives in self defence and that he had been subject to abuse for more than two years.

He admitted that when he was pulled off the deceased he had shouted “let him die”. He had also shouted that the stabbing was revenge for his brother but, in fact, nothing at all had happened to his brother.

Psychiatrists agreed that Donelly was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning arising from schizophrenia at the time of the attack.

"That abnormality substantially impaired his ability to form a rational judgment and to exercise self-control," Mr Justice O’Hara said in sentencing.

A pre-sentence report stated that the defendant did not meet the threshold to be assessed as a significant risk of serious harm. That was based on his limited criminal record and the fact that the risk of further violence is “inextricably linked to a return to cannabis use and/or non-compliance with medication”.

"The team’s view was that as long as he remained substance free and compliant with his treatment the risk of further violence is minimised," the judgment stated.

The court, however, considered those were “two huge caveats” noting that before the attack Donnelly had not received any medical treatment for 10 years, he was using cannabis freely and while there was evidence that he is responding well to treatment the turnaround in his mental health was slow.

"In my judgment, the state which this defendant was in, when he was paranoid and hearing voices, was the result in significant measure of his own failure to seek any medical treatment or counselling, his use of cannabis and his failure to do anything with his life other apparently than drift," Mr Justice O'Hara added.

"The court did not think a life sentence was appropriate in this case as it is one which is only imposed where the defendant’s culpability is particularly high or the offence itself is particularly grave.

"It did not think an extended custodial sentence was appropriate as it has, in effect, an expiry date beyond which there is no oversight of the defendant’s conduct. The court did not consider this to be sufficiently protective in light of the future risks to the public and all of the uncertainties in this case.

The court said an indeterminate custodial sentence achieves the "best possible protection of the public in circumstances such as this case from the risk which may continue to be posed in the future by this defendant".

On Sentencing, Mr Justice O'Hara said: “It is the heaviest sentence which a court can impose other than a life sentence, but in this case, it is the proper one. In all the circumstances, and allowing specifically for the guilty plea, I consider that the proper tariff is nine years.

"That is the minimum period which [the defendant] must serve in prison before his release can be considered by the Parole Commissioners."

Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know.