A COUPLE who exacted their revenge on a 55-year-old man failed to “get their stories matched up” after they were arrested one week apart from each other, a court heard.

Alex Potter and Bibi Stone were convicted on Friday of planning and carrying out the stabbing of Lee Jackson at his flat in St John’s Avenue, Colchester.

The victim was taken to Colchester Hospital and made a full recovery before Potter and Stone were charged.

Guilty – Alex Potter and Bibi StoneGuilty – Alex Potter and Bibi Stone (Image: Essex Police / Newsquest) Lucy Sweetland, prosecuting, told the jury they were presented with two defendants “lying” about what happened.

Potter claimed he had acted in self-defence, telling the jury under cross-examination that Mr Jackson came to the door armed with a cosh and a knife, whilst Stone told the court Mr Jackson was armed with a baseball bat.

The two defendants also claimed there was a fight inside the flat, but Mr Jackson said he was stabbed by Potter as soon as he opened the door.

Ms Sweetland said: “You have got two people lying to you.

“They haven’t got their stories matched up because they were arrested at different times and knew all they could do is stick to it.”

She said Mr Jackson’s account of what happened had remained consistent from the moment he was interviewed on a hospital trolley to when he gave evidence before the jury at Ipswich Crown Court.

She continued: “Look at the injuries to all parties, and it’s clear that there was no melee, but that Lee Jackson was taken by surprise, overpowered, and that the knife has been used very deliberately in the hand of Potter throughout.”

It was also argued Potter had worn gloves during the incident so he did not leave behind any fingerprints on the knife, and that the two defendants had always intended to attack Mr Jackson.

Ms Sweetland said: “You will also want to consider the behaviour of the defendants.

Trial – a jury sat at Ipswich Crown Court for ten daysTrial – a jury sat at Ipswich Crown Court for ten days (Image: Daniel Rees, Newsquest)

“Why are they shouting, ‘Come out, come out?’

“Why is there a good minute before they smash the windows?

“Think about it in this way: the defendants insist that their plan was primarily to break the windows.

“It’s strange, then, that neither of them brought with them anything to do so with.

“The ultimate objective was something else.”