Alexander Davidson carried out a “revenge attack” in Liverpool city centre
Alexander Davidson(Image: Merseyside Police)
A thug stabbed a man in the neck in a “revenge” attack after apparently being “ripped off” in a drug deal. Alexander Davidson was said to have carried out the brutal assault in a pharmacy while “desperate” for heroin and crack cocaine.
The addict then ditched the weapon which he used to stab his victim before being arrested in Liverpool ONE later the same day. A judge today told him that he was “exceptionally lucky” not to be facing a murder charge in an incident that could have “easily” killed the other man.
Liverpool Crown Court heard today, Thursday, that Mark Thompson entered Kays Pharmacy on London Road in Liverpool city centre at around 3.30pm on March 4 this year in order to pick up his prescription. A daily visitor to the chemists, staff described him as being a “quiet individual” who “never caused any trouble”.
But Tom Challinor, prosecuting, outlined how he was followed into the pharmacy by Davidson, who was captured on CCTV approaching from behind as the complainant stood at the counter before plunging a “sharp bladed implement” into his neck. A friend who had accompanied Mr Thompson’s friend then rushed to his aid by pulling the defendant’s hood over his head and dragging him away during a scuffle.
Davidson, of no fixed address, then “retreated and exited” the premises. The now 38-year-old, who was appearing in court two days after his birthday, was later arrested in Liverpool ONE in possession of a pair of tweezers after officers recognised him from footage of the attack, which had been circulated among the force.
Mr Thompson, who did not cooperate with Merseyside Police’s investigation into the assault, was left with his hands covered in blood following the incident and “appearing blank and in shock”. He sustained a “2cm deep linear laceration” to the left hand side of his neck as a result, a wound which was stapled shut after he was taken to the Royal Liverpool Hospital for treatment.
Davidson has a total of 34 previous convictions for 59 offences, dating back to 2003. This includes a suspended prison sentence for unlawful wounding in 2013, a 30-month stretch for assault occasioning actual bodily harm and five years for drug trafficking offences at Exeter Crown Court in 2007.
Matthew O’Neill, defending, told the court: “I concede that the defendant’s antecedents will aggravate the sentence. He is realistic as to the likely outcome today. He has been in custody for coming up to four-and-a-half months. Mr Davidson’s presentation today is in stark contrast to the way your honour will have seen on the CCTV footage.
“He has a history of misuse of class A drugs, which brings violence and acquisitive crime. Mr Davidson explains how he came about committing this offence, which was clearly borne out of a desperation for heroin and crack cocaine.”
Davidson was said to have given an account to the Probation Service of being “homeless and addicted” to said drugs at the time, leading to him apparently handing money to an unnamed man and woman in the morning prior to the attack so that they could purchase illicit substances on his behalf. However, the female later reportedly informed him that she had been “given the incorrect amount of drugs”.
As a result, he then “made his way to the chemists for the rest of the drugs which he believed he was owed”. While Davidson was “unable to provide a reason for harming the victim”, he went on to state that he “went to the chemists because he ripped him off”.
When Recorder William Beardmore asked whether this amounted to a motive of “revenge”, Mr O’Neill replied: “It was the cause of him feeling angered and desperate to retrieve what he believed he was owed. He has shown a level of regret and remorse for his actions. His contrition highlights the person that Mr Davidson can be when not under the influence of such substances.
“The four-and-a-half months he has spent in custody has been used productively. He is addressing his class A misuse. He is working in waste disposal and using every effort to change his life around while he is in custody. He is someone who shows a completely different side to him when not addicted to drugs.
“It is a case, sadly, of what could have been for Mr Davidson. He is one of two children. He attended Liverpool College on a scholarship, aged 11. He has a level of intelligence that you would not ordinarily come across in cases of this nature.
“He tells me, very sadly, that, at the age of 11, after his first year at Liverpool College, he was involved in a serious road traffic collision. Ever since then, his life has started to unravel. He had to leave the well respected secondary school and struggled thereafter. He started smoking cannabis from a young age, which led on to heroin and crack cocaine.
“His sister is a scientist who works at the Royal Liverpool Hospital. It is a very sad state of affairs, but Mr Davidson seeks to put no one at blame other than himself for how his life has turned out. He is confident, hopeful and determined to ensure that this will be the last time that he troubles the doors of the courts.”
Davidson admitted one count of unlawful wounding and, appearing via video link to HMP Liverpool, was jailed for 33 months. Sentencing, Recorder Beardmore said: “You have numerous previous convictions for matters of violence. You have many other previous convictions which are indicative of your long standing and sustained addiction to class A drugs.
“The wound that you caused was significant. A CT scan revealed a deep injury to the left side of the neck. You were searched and found in possession of a set of tweezers, not a knife. The only sensible inference that can be drawn is that you had disposed of the weapon used to attack Mr Thompson.
“The prosecution were not able to say what stood in the background to this offending. You had made perfectly plain that you had sought to buy crack cocaine and heroin to feed your addiction. She had less drugs than you paid for. Your response, out of desperation, was to make your way to the pharmacy where you knew Mr Thompson to be.
“You then attacked him. You believed that it was Mr Thompson who had ripped you off. Taking your account as true, it can only mean this. You formed a plan in your mind at a point in time when you believed you had been ripped off. That involved harming Mr Thompson. You stabbed him in the neck. This was a targeted revenge attack. There can be no other sensible conclusion from the facts of this case.
“There are a number of aggravating features in this case. You have multiple previous convictions for offences of violence. It is a significant aggravating feature that this was a revenge attack and that you disposed of the weapon after you attacked Mr Thompson.
“There is some degree of mitigation that can be obtained from your admissions and frankness, but it is very limited. You stabbed someone in the neck. You thought that they were responsible, in some way, for a drug deal in which you had been ripped off.
“You attacked a vulnerable part of his body and left him with a significant wound. You could have easily severed the carotid artery or jugular vein. That would have killed him, and you would have been facing an allegation of murder. You should regard yourself exceptionally lucky.”