Due to the ‘family friend’s’ two Rolex watches and a court declaration, a father and his two sons killed him. On March 15 of last year, Darren Smith was ambushed inside Smoke City and Cell Me Phones in Shard End by Lee O’Brien, 54, Luke O’Brien, 36, and Lewis O’Brien, 32.
After beating and dragging the fifty-year-old to the ground, they took his two watches and fled. But a few minutes later Mr Smith collapsed outside and died of a heart attack. When the victim appeared in Birmingham Crown Court the next day, Mr. Smith was expected to appear in court and ‘exonerate him’. The victim and Lee O’Brien were co-defendants in a case involving stolen cars at the time.
Following the deadly assault, the father and his sons escaped to Torquay, where they were apprehended. Luke attempted to escape into the sea, throwing away a phone and bank notes, but he was apprehended after yelling, “I can’t breathe,” and “I can’t swim.”
The three O’Brien brothers—Lee, who lives on Lea Hall Road in Stechford, Luke, who lives on Fleet Street in the heart of Birmingham, and Lewis, who lives on Sunnymead Road in Yardley—were scheduled to be sentenced today after admitting to the manslaughter of Mr. Smith. The question of whether they intended to rob him before they entered the store or if it was an on-the-spot decision once inside is still up for legal debate.
‘Regular customer’ Mr. Smith was, according to prosecutor Mark Heywood KC, a fixture at the Heathway, Shard End store. He went there on March 15, 2018, to purchase a phone case, and just before 3 p.m., he was attacked. “Lee O’Brien and Mr. Smith, despite being close friends for a long time, had two disagreements at this point,” he stated.
“To begin with, Mr. Smith and Lee O’Brien were co-defendants in a theft case involving cars that had been stolen. Lee O’Brien was scheduled to appear in court the following day, March 16, for a pre-trial review, after Mr. Smith entered a guilty plea to his role. Lee O’Brien had anticipated receiving a statement from Mr. Smith clearing him of any involvement, but one had not yet materialised.
“Luke O’Brien also referred to his belief that Mr Smith owed Lee O’Brien money arising from car dealing the two of them had done in the time leading up to this.”
Luke also said that Mr. Smith was ‘avoiding’ paying the money he allegedly owed and ‘kept going on holidays’. Lewis is the first person to enter the store on CCTV footage taken inside, holding a socket wrench in one hand. Shortly after Luke arrived, the brothers started fighting with Mr. Smith.
Then Lee came in and, according to what the court heard, he falsely accused Mr. Smith of being a “rapist,” threatening the storekeeper not to take pictures or call the police. During the struggle, Mr. Smith was knocked to the ground, had a Rolex watch taken off of each wrist, and had a cut on his head that was obviously bleeding.
Following the three defendants out of the store, Mr. Smith confronted them outside before going back inside, making a call, and pacing the area. Mr. Heywood added that the man had suffered a fatal heart attack and that as he went back outside he ‘became unsteady on his feet, staggered and fell over onto his back’.
He was a recreational cocaine user in addition to having a number of pre-existing medical conditions, such as diabetes and coronary heart disease, according to a post-mortem examination. Experts determined that while he was always vulnerable to unexpected death, he most likely would not have passed away on March 15 if he had not been beaten.
“None of the defendants needed to have known Mr. Smith had risk factors,” Mr. Heywood stated. Perhaps he didn’t know about some of them himself.”
The next day, all three defendants were taken into custody in Torquay. They all continued by saying that, despite their earlier attempts to locate Mr. Smith in order to get the court statement, they ended up robbing him because of the altercation.
However, Mr. Heywood contended that there was a “strong indication they were willing to steal before they entered the store.” Judge Melbourne Inman KC will make a determination on the matter after a trial of issue hearing at a later time.
