You will want to know what happened, why it shocked a community, and what the police say about a chilling note allegedly left after the killing of 12-year-old Leo Ross. A teenager has been accused of a random, fatal stabbing and investigators say a note found afterwards adds a disturbing layer to the case.
The next sections explain the key facts of the attack, the timeline of events, and how the investigation and court process unfolded, including the sentence handed down. Follow the details to understand how authorities linked the suspect to the crime and what the court decided.
Key Facts from the Stabbing Incident
Authorities confirmed the victim was a 12‑year‑old boy found injured near a riverside path and later pronounced dead. Officials say the attack involved a bladed article and appears to have no prior connection between victim and attacker.
Timeline and Location of the Attack
Leo Ross was attacked on 21 January while walking home from school near a riverside path in Shire Country Park, close to Yardley Wood and Trittiford Mill Park. Emergency services reached the scene and transported Leo to hospital, where he later died of his injuries.
Police say the offender was riding a bicycle at the time and that the knife used in the attack was discarded into the River Cole nearby. Court records note the defendant was 14 at the time of the incident and pleaded guilty to murder at a later hearing.
Witness accounts and CCTV inquiries placed both the victim and the youth in the park area shortly before and after the stabbing. Authorities processed the riverside path and surrounding parkland as part of their investigation.
Discovery of the Chilling Note
Investigators reported finding a chilling note linked to the accused, though specifics given publicly were limited. The court and police disclosures indicate the note factored into the portrayal of the offender’s mindset during hearings.
Prosecutors described the defendant’s behavior after the attack, including approaching officers and falsely claiming to have discovered Leo. That conduct, together with the written material, contributed to judicial characterisations of the acts as calculated rather than impulsive.
Family statements read in court highlighted the emotional weight of the note for Leo’s relatives and foster family, who described the killing as senseless and unprovoked. The presence of the note amplified concerns about motive and premeditation during sentencing.
Random Nature of the Violent Attack
Senior officers and the judge emphasised that Leo had no known link to his attacker and that the stabbing was effectively random. Police termed the incident a campaign of violence by the same youth that included earlier attacks on elderly women in the same period.
The pattern included separate incidents of grievous bodily harm and possession of a bladed article on adjacent days, suggesting the fatal attack fit into a broader sequence of assaults. Sentencing remarks noted the defendant had previously targeted other victims and appeared to take satisfaction in the disorder caused.
Community leaders and family members reacted to the randomness with shock, saying a child walking home from school was robbed of his life for no apparent reason. That sense of unpredictability drove wider public concern about youth violence and knife carrying in public green spaces.
Investigation, Court Proceedings, and Sentencing
West Midlands Police led the criminal inquiry, recovered evidence from the scene, and interviewed witnesses and the suspect. Court documents and police statements outline a sequence of attacks over several days that culminated in the fatal stabbing.
West Midlands Police Investigation
West Midlands Police collected CCTV, bodycam footage, and witness statements that placed the suspect at the scene in Yardley Wood on 21 January 2025. Officers traced the teenager’s movements through park CCTV and corroborated accounts from passers-by who saw him approach victims.
Detectives also linked earlier incidents on 19 and 20 January where the same youth was accused of attacks described in charging papers as grievous bodily harm. Forensic teams recovered a bladed article and processed it for prints and DNA. Investigators briefed the family and coordinated with child-protection agencies while building the file for prosecution.
Charges and Court Hearing
The defendant, who was 14 at the time of the offences and later identified in reporting, pleaded guilty to murder and earlier admitted to two counts of causing grievous bodily harm with intent plus an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The admissions covered attacks on separate victims on 19–21 January 2025.
Pre-trial hearings at Birmingham Crown Court considered anonymity orders and whether reporting restrictions should be lifted. Defence counsel presented medical and psychiatric material, noting diagnoses and episodes of hearing voices. The prosecution opened a factual narrative tying the suspect to a series of violent incidents that preceded the killing.
Sentencing at Birmingham Crown Court
Justice Choudhury delivered the sentence during a public hearing at Birmingham Crown Court, deciding on a life term with a minimum term of 13 years, reduced for time already spent on remand. The judge described the offences as part of a “campaign of serious violence” and set out reasons for the custodial term in detail.
During the sentencing hearing, victim impact statements and remarks from the judge highlighted the harm to the family and community. The court ordered the offender to be detained and placed conditions on licence if ever released, noting the Parole Board must be satisfied before any release.
More from Decluttering Mom: