
Plastic surgeon who attempted to murder fellow doctor is jailed for life
Peter Brooks, 61, knifed Graeme Perks and doused the ground floor of his house with petrol with intent to set it on fire after cycling to the property in Halam, near Southwell, Nottinghamshire, in the early hours of January 14 2021.
Jailing him at Leicester Crown Court, sitting in Loughborough, on Monday, Judge Mr Justice Pepperall said Brooks had committed 'appalling' crimes after setting off from his home on a 'murderous expedition'.
Brooks, who was 'voluntarily absent' from his month-long trial because he was on hunger strike and said he would 'rather be dead than incarcerated', did not appear in person for the sentencing hearing on Monday after refusing to leave his cell.
Stephen Leslie KC, defending, said Brooks had said he was too unwell to make the journey to court and instead listened to proceedings via video link from HMP Norwich.
Mr Justice Pepperall previously told the court that on 'no fewer than eight occasions' since 2021 Brooks, formerly of Landseer Road, Southwell, had 'used hunger strikes or the threat of some other self-harm to achieve some advantage'.
Brooks' convictions followed a four-year series of legal hearings, including a mistrial and seven other aborted trial dates.
The consultant, specialising in burns and plastics, was convicted in April of two counts of attempted murder, one for the intended use of fire and the other for the stabbing, attempted arson with intent to endanger life, and possession of a knife in a public place.
The trial was told Brooks had cycled in the snow to Mr Perks' home during a Covid lockdown wearing camouflage gear and armed with a crowbar, petrol, matches and a knife.
Mr Perks, a consultant plastic surgeon, had provided evidence in disciplinary proceedings against Brooks, who faced potentially losing his job with Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, the jury heard.
When opening the prosecution's case, Tracy Ayling KC had told the trial it was 'clear that the defendant hated Graeme Perks' and wanted him 'out of the way'.
Mr Perks, who was 65 at the time, had retired the month before the attack but suffered 'extremely life-threatening' injuries to his liver, intestines and pancreas, and was given a 95% chance of death.
The victim woke up when Brooks smashed through his conservatory, and went downstairs where his feet 'felt a bit damp' from the petrol before he felt a 'blow to his body'.
The court was told Brooks had also thrown petrol up the stair walls while Mr Perks' wife Bev and youngest son Henry were sleeping upstairs.
The defendant was found asleep on a garden bench later that morning when he was taken to hospital for injuries to his hand, and was arrested.
In a victim impact statement read to the court by Ms Ayling, Mr Perks said the incident had been an 'unimaginable catastrophe' for him and his family.
He said: 'This has been a nightmare for my wife and son who must have wondered if I was going to survive.
'This has been beyond every struggle in our lives so far.'
He added: 'I have no ill-feelings, hatred or bitterness towards my ex-colleague and derive no satisfaction from the guilty conviction.
'It is just another interesting chapter in life, and I wish his family well.
'I remain eternally grateful that it was me, not Bev or Henry who were stabbed, and reflect how ironic that a burns surgeon should wish to immolate our family.'
Henry Perks, Mr Perks' son, described Brooks as a 'highly dangerous and remorseless individual' and 'nothing more than a bully', adding: 'He simply has no morals, sees no wrong in his actions and will stop at nothing to hurt those he perceives to have wronged him.
'I have no doubt his failure to silence my father will consume his mind and make him dangerous in the years after his release.'
Ms Ayling said Brooks was 'manipulative' and had shown no remorse for what he had done.
She said: 'He believes himself to be not guilty of the offences. He believes he has been unlawfully tried.
'He has a history of being manipulative.'
Mitigating, Mr Leslie said it was a 'single act of violence' and that there was no pre-planning beyond the day of the attack.
He said Brooks had petrol in his garage because he was a motorbike enthusiast and that he is 'beginning to show remorse' for what he had done.
He told the court: 'He has done a lot of good in the world for many people. He should be provided with a chance to reform himself. There is still good in him.
'He is now 61, he must have the opportunity of coming out in his lifetime to return to society and be given the opportunity to carry out the good work he has demonstrated.'
Mr Justice Pepperall said Brooks must serve a minimum of 22 years, with time spent in prison already taking that to 17 years and 223 days, for the two counts of attempted murder.
A sentence of six years for arson and 18 months for possessing a knife are to run concurrently.
The judge said Brooks, who specialised in treating burns, would have known the significant damage setting a fire would have caused as well as how badly Mr Perks would have been injured when he plunged a knife into him.
He said Brooks was 'fixated' on employment difficulties he was facing and blamed Mr Perks for his troubles, with his 'sense of grievance developing into deep anger' as he faced losing his career and his home.
Mr Justice Pepperall said he could not be sure whether Brooks had spent more than a few hours before breaking into Mr Perks' house planning the 'murderous expedition' and despite Brooks' claims he had acted in self-defence when confronted by Mr Perks, the judge said he was sure that the defendant was the 'sole aggressor'.
He also said he could not detect any remorse for what he had done, and instead that Brooks felt 'self-pity for the situation you find yourself in'.
In a statement after Brooks was sentenced, Sam Shallow from the Crown Prosecution Service said: 'Peter Brooks committed an act of extreme violence, attempting to murder a highly respected colleague.
'This was a planned, calculated attack, in which Brooks showed he was determined to kill his former colleague.
'Since committing these atrocious acts, Brooks has sought to evade responsibility. He has requested late adjournments, dispensed with his legal team, and used his health to avoid proper progress of the court proceedings.
'On each of the nine occasions the case has been listed at court, the prosecution team has been ready.
'Justice has now caught up with Brooks.
'His victim was fortunate to escape with his life and his whole family were in danger from Brooks's inexplicable actions.
'Despite the physical and emotional trauma they have endured, they have come to court to tell their story on two separate occasions.
'This has been a long process for them, but I hope that finally seeing these proceedings coming to a close will help them in their recovery from this ordeal.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
Woman killed husband by ‘stabbing and slicing' over 50 times with samurai sword
A woman killed her husband with a samurai sword, 'stabbing and slicing him' more than 50 times before replacing the sword in its sheath on a stand, a court heard. Joanna Rowland-Stuart, 71, has been deemed 'unfit to plead' to the murder of her husband Andrew Rowland-Stuart, 69, in their 15th-floor flat in Lavender Street in Brighton, on May 27 last year. She told police attending the scene that 'she had no choice' but to kill him, after he attacked her with the sword, which she had bought in the 1980s. When police and paramedics arrived on the scene, they tried to conduct life-saving treatment, but Mr Rowland-Stuart's injuries were 'simply not survivable'. On Monday, jurors at Lewes Crown Court were told they must determine whether Rowland-Stuart's actions were unlawful, but that she would not be involved in proceedings. Prosecuting, Charlotte Newell KC said there was 'no doubt' Rowland-Stuart had inflicted the injuries, 'which she did by stabbing and slicing him over 50 – five-zero – times with a samurai sword.' Ms Newell continued: 'Although Joanna Rowland-Stuart made some suggestion to attending police officers at the time that she did act in self-defence – the crown suggest that can safely be rejected. 'On the basis that, whatever the cause for attacking Andrew, the sheer number and the nature of the wounds that she inflicted, could not possibly be a reasonable use of force.' On the evening of the attack, Rowland-Stuart went to her neighbour's flat across the hall from her own, wearing just her underwear, covered in her husband's blood. By this time, she had already tried to wash herself and the sword clean of Andy's blood in the shower, the prosecution said. Her neighbour proceeded to call the police, and she told the operator: 'My husband Andy has tried to kill me with a samurai sword – in the scuffle I have managed to turn the sword towards him and he has fallen on the sword.' Jurors heard that Rowland-Stuart, who is transgender, married Mr Rowland Stuart, known as Andy, in a civil partnership in 2006. Their neighbours gave witness statements that described them as a 'normal couple' who they had never heard arguing. Describing the scene, Ms Newell said: 'Andy was lying in the small living room in a pool of blood – he was covered in blood from significant knife wounds to his hands, his arms and to his torso – he was wearing underwear and a long sleeve t-shirt and that was soaked through. 'The samurai sword, which had been used to inflict all bar one of the injuries, had been placed back on a sheath and back on its stand from where it was later recovered.' This morning, Rowland-Stuart was found 'unfit' to plead and participate in her trial. Judge Christine Laing KC ruled: 'She would be an unreliable witness in her own defence and would not be fit to be cross-examined, and for those reasons alone I find her unfit to plead.' A trial of the act, which decides if someone physically committed a crime, rather than their intent, will continue tomorrow morning.


The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
What happened at the Battle of Orgreave – and why is there an inquiry 40 years laster?
The government has announced it is launching a statutory inquiry into the violent policing at Orgreave during the infamous miner's strike of 1984. Dubbed the 'Battle of Orgreave' by historians, the event saw dozens of picketers and police injured in a morning clash with an estimated 14,000 participants. The inquiry will also look into the collapsed cases of the 95 miners accused of offences there, more than four decades after the events. Home secretary Yvette Cooper announced the inquiry having first informed campaigners last Thursday. She spoke from the site in Orgreave where the coking plant that was the target of the picketing was located. 'People have waited for answers for over 40 years,' she said. 'The scale of the clashes, the injuries, the prosecutions, the discredited evidence, all of those things – there's still so many unanswered questions.' 'I think the miners' strike still has deep scars across coalfield communities, and the decisions made at that time – the broadest decisions that were taken by the Thatcher government in the 1980s – the scars can still be felt across the coalfields.' Here's everything you need to know: What happened at the Battle of Orgreave? On 18 June 1984, one of the most brutal clashes in modern British policing history unfolded as workers organised by the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) gathered to picket a South Yorkshire coking plant. The previous evening, NUM president Arthur Scargill addressed miners about plans for the following days' picket. Around 2,000 miners were due to visit Orgreave, a major plant near Rotherham where coal was processed into coke to be used in British Steel factories. Picketers begin gathering as early as 4am on the hot day, and by 7am are being guided in their thousands by police to a nearby field. Here, an estimated 6,000 police officers have assembled, and are facing around 8,000 picketers. Many of the officers are equipped with truncheons, riot shields, or on horseback. Just after 8am, empty wagons begin arriving to pick up coke from the plant. Miners begin pushing towards police line, and police push back. At this point, picketers recall struggling to keep their footing or even breathe in the crush. A few minutes later, the police line opens up, and officers on horses carrying long truncheons advance on the miners. Two more charges like this would take place within the hour, as one senior officer is filmed advising the police: 'Bodies, not heads.' The third charge is accompanied by snatch squads – police with batons and short shields – marking the first time this kind of unit had been deployed on the UK mainland. Miners that have not fled are dragged out of the crowd and pulled to the ground. One news report captures footage of a miner named Russell Broomhead being repeatedly hit in the head with a truncheon. Around 2,000 of the remaining miners are sent to another entrance to Orgreave, where there is another large field. Gates open at 10.15am, when around 30 lorries packed with coke leave the site. Pickets attempt to stop them, and more arrests are made, with allegations of more violence. It is during this final frenzy of activity that Mr Scargill is injured, claiming he had been hit by a police shield. He said: 'All I know is that these bastards rushed in and this guy hit me on the back of my head with a shield and I was out.' Police deny that Mr Scargill was hit by a shield. The lorries get through, and police continue to attempt to disperse remaining picketers. The horse charges and snatch squad activity continues until around 1pm, when the majority of the violence subsides. What was the aftermath? Following the clash, South Yorkshire Police was accused by critics of having pre-planned the violence and overstating the unlawful behaviour of the striking miners. This criticism was also lodged against then-prime minister Margaret Thatcher, who said the Orgreave picketers had attempted to 'substitute the rule of the mob for the rule of law,' adding that the strike action failed 'because of the magnificent police force well trained for carrying out their duties bravely and impartially.' The following year, the prosecution against 95 of the picketers charged with riot, unlawful assembly and similar offences collapsed. All charges were dropped after their barristers repeatedly accused police officers of lying. Michael Mansfield KC, who represented several of the miners in court, called the event 'the worst example of a mass frame-up in this country this century.' A number of lawsuits were subsequently brought against South Yorkshire Police for assault, unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution. The force would later agree to pay £425,000 compensation and £100,000 in legal costs to 39 picketers in an out-of-court settlement. To this day, the police have not admitted any fault, and no officer has been disciplined for misconduct, Why has an inquiry been launched now? The subsequent 41 years have seen several calls for an official inquiry into the events. In 2012, the Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign (OTJC) was launched following the success of the Hillsborough Justice Campaign in forcing an investigation into police conduct in that event. However, in 2015, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said it would launch a formal investigation because too much time had passed. Prior to the July 2025 general election, the Labour Party led by Sir Keir Starmer promised to launch an inquiry into Orgreave should it secure victory. A year on from its election, the government has delivered on that promise. OTJC secretary, Kate Flannery, said: 'We have waited a long time for this day and this is really positive news. All these years of hard work by the OTJC and our many supporters has helped to influence this constructive announcement. 'We now need to be satisfied that the inquiry is given the necessary powers to fully investigate all the aspects of the orchestrated policing at Orgreave, and have unrestricted access to all relevant information including government, police and media documents, photos and films' The NUM president, Chris Kitchen, said: 'We are over the moon. We're hoping the inquiry will show that our dispute, which we believe was industrial, was political, orchestrated from No 10, or higher up the food chain towards No 10. 'We never came to this field to cause a riot or to deliberately lame people. I don't think that was the same for the police, who came tooled up, with a plan to injure us, and to try and get the public perception on their side and end the strike.' A spokesperson for South Yorkshire police said: 'We will fully cooperate with the inquiry in a bid to help those affected find answers.'


Telegraph
2 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The Daily T: Reform's crime crackdown - Can Farage really fly prisoners to El Salvador?
Nigel Farage is pledging to halve crime in Britain if Reform UK gets into the government. In a speech in central London this morning, the Reform leader unveiled plans for a sweeping overhaul of Britain's justice system, including 30,000 new prison places and 30,000 new police officers on the streets. It comes as a new J L Partners survey puts Reform six points ahead of Labour and a staggering 12 points ahead of the Tories. He's promising that no violent criminal or sex offender will be released early under his watch, and that foreign offenders will be sent back to their countries - or even jailed overseas in countries like El Salvador. Camilla and Tim were there to witness the announcement as Farage says it's time to end 'two-tier justice' in Britain. But will it actually work and how much will it all cost? And as Labour announces a massive overhaul of the water industry, including scrapping Ofwat the regulator, Camilla grills the environment secretary Steve Reed on our rising water bills.