Jurors have begun their deliberations in the trial of two teenagers accused of killing 15-year-old Amen Teklay in Glasgow.
On Friday afternoon, the jury retired to commence their discussions on the charge of murder at the High Court in the city.
With no verdict reached by 4pm on Friday, the deliberations are due to resume on Monday morning.
Two teenagers aged 16 and 17, who cannot be named due to their age, have been on trial accused of murdering the 15-year-old in a sword attack.
Amen was found seriously injured on Clarendon Street, Maryhill, on the evening of March 5 last year and died at the scene.
The murder charge alleges that the two teenage boys, with their faces masked, assaulted Amen and brandished a frying pan and a sword or similar instrument at him at Glenfarg Street and Clarendon Street on March 5 last year.
It is alleged that the pair chased Amen and struck him on the body with the sword, leaving him so severely injured that he died.
The two boys deny the charge and the 16-year-old has lodged a special defence of self-defence.
Judge Lord Colbeck gave his instructions to the jury, asking them to give the case their “careful attention”.
I have no doubt that (Amen's) family loves him and misses him. By your verdict you cannot restore Amen Teklay to his family... sympathy plays no part in the verdict process
He told the jury: “You are the ones who decide whether this is a murder or not.”
The judge said that if the jury accepted the first accused’s defence that he acted in self-defence, then they must acquit.
He said the first accused, who is 16, accepts that he stabbed Amen, and the issue is whether he acted in self-defence or if he may have been provoked.
Lord Colbeck said that if the jury finds the first accused guilty, they then must consider whether the second accused acted in concert with him.
Earlier, Iain McSporran KC addressed jurors for about an hour on Friday on behalf of the second accused, who is 17.
He said his client had assisted police with their investigation and spoke at length to detectives in the days after Amen’s death.
Mr McSporran said: “As far as he was concerned, he had done nothing wrong.”
The lawyer said prosecutors had overreached by charging his client, and that the 17-year-old “was not involved in any feud or drug dealing or gang”.
He said his client had enough knowledge to be “wary” of Amen but wished him no harm, saying: “He did not lay a finger on Amen Teklay and the prosecution do not say otherwise.”
Mr McSporran said there was a lack of evidence on which to convict his client on the basis of a common criminal enterprise with the first accused.
He said that on the day of the incident, Amen Teklay had “gone out of his way” to find the first accused, and that Amen had been armed with a weapon described as a “cutlass” or a “pirate sword”.
He told jurors: “I have no doubt that (Amen’s) family loves him and misses him.”
He added: “By your verdict you cannot restore Amen Teklay to his family…
“Sympathy plays no part in the verdict process.”