The jury in the trial of Stephen Tompkinson, over an alleged attack on a drunken man outside his home, will resume its deliberations tomorrow (Thursday, May 11).

On the fourth day of the case of the Stockton-born actor at Newcastle Crown Court, the jury retired to consider its verdict in mid-afternoon today.

But, having not reached a verdict by 4.20pm, the trial judge, The Recorder of Newcastle, Judge Paul Sloan, sent them home for the night and asked them to return to court to continue deliberating its verdict at 10am on Friday.

The 57-year-old star of several notable television series and stage productions is accused of inflicting grievous bodily harm on Karl Poole, who was said to be one of two drunken men causing a disturbance outside the defendant’s home, in Whitley Bay, at 5.30am, on Sunday, May 30, 2021.

Read more: Stockton's Stephen Tompkinson did not intend 'traumatic brain injury'

It is the prosecution’s case that “in anger” at their conduct he came out and raised his hand to Mr Poole, who was wearing only boxer shorts and socks, having just come from the beach.

An independent witness, a neighbour who lived 30-metres away along the street, described Mr Tomkinson as being the apparent aggressor, first slapping and then punching Mr Poole, who staggered backwards and dropped to the ground in an unbroken fall, which was later found to have caused him traumatic brain injuries.

Prosecution counsel Michael Bunch told the jury: “Some time after 5.30am that morning, Karl Poole sustained a traumatic head injury.

“How that happened, how he ended up in the road, is the central question you have to decide upon in this case.

“In reality, it boils down to why?

“Was Mr Poole punched by Mr Tompkinson in anger or was the anger Mr Poole’s when the defendant challenged him over his drunken condition?”

He told jurors that if they were sure Mr Poole was deliberately assaulted by Mr Tompkinson, who wasn’t acting in self-defence, it would be their duty to convict the defendant.

But Mr Bunch told them: “If the prosecution has not made you sure, you must find Mr Tompkinson not guilty.”

Mr Bunch said: “The fact he (Mr Tompkinson) is a well-known actor and is well thought of, should be no surprise”, but he described this as, “window dressing and not the meat of the case.”

He told the jury: “No-one is saying he set out to cause the injuries or to cause him any significant harm at all.

“The hard case is that he intentionally and unlawfully assaulted Mr Poole by throwing a slap and a punch to Mr Poole.”

Read more: Stockton-born actor said he only 'pushed' man outside Whitley Bay home

Mr Bunch said the defendant may have regretted it even from the moment he delivered those blows.

“The Crown’s case is simple. He snapped and lashed out and, as a consequence, Mr Poole sustained serious injuries.

“Nobody is saying the defendant wanted to cause any significant harm to either of these men.”

It is the defendant’s case that he was holding his mobile phone waiting to be put through to police and only put up his hand to prevent Mr Poole approaching him any further.

Nicholas Lumley, for the defendant, said it is accepted by the defence that the witness may have thought she saw Mr Tomkinson throwing a punch.

But he told the jury that she was 100ft away, looking from the window of her home and in shock at the scene.

He suggested she was mistaken at what she believed she had seen down the street at that time of day.

Mr Lumley said the fact that the defendant did not ring for an ambulance as Mr Poole lay unconscious on the ground was because he believed him to be asleep.

“No-one thought Mr Poole was anything other than extremely drunk.”

Mr Lumley reminded jurors that a pathologist’s evidence was that a forceful push could have had the same effect as a forceful punch in causing Mr Poole to fall over.

He pointed out that there was an absence of assault-like injuries to his face, which, “may be relevant”.

Mr Lumley said Mr Tomkinson was, "entirely sober" and had just been folding laundry, and was wearing only his pyjamas and dressing gown, when he heard the disturbance and went outside to see what was happening.

"He had every reason then, and now, not to assault a complete stranger.

"He's not that sort of person.

"We suggest whatever he did, he did in self-defence, and was reasonable and would have been done by many of us."

Mr Lumley said the consequences were, "tragic" and "unintended".

"They don't make Stephen Tompkinson guilty.

"The correct verdict in this case is one of 'not guilty'."

Read next:

* Jury in Stephen Tompkinson GBH trial retires to consider verdict

* Stephen Tompkinson tells court it would be ‘career suicide’ to assault someone

* Stephen Tompkinson case: Man left unconscious outside Whitley Bay home

Subscribe to a Premium Plus package to The Northern Echo from as little as £1.50 per week and read more quality stories and extras. Click here

Mr Tompkinson denies the charge of inflicting grievous bodily harm.

The jury will continue its deliberations tomorrow (Friday May 11).

Proceeding.