That concludes the hearing.

Shouts of “love you” and “see you later lad” are heard from the public gallery as the defendants are led to the dock.

Sands is meanwhile seen wiping his eyes with his t-shirt as he leaves court.

Finally, the judge tells Sands: “You are to be sentenced only for count three, conspiracy to possess the Glock pistol. Your culpability is high, because it is a type one weapon and because, informing this conspiracy, you agreed with three older men who have criminal records to jointly possess it, and in so doing the only common sense conclusion I can come to is that you must have been at least reckless as to whether it would be used for a criminal purpose.

“It is aggravated by the fact that it was a conspiracy or group offence, and you have 18 previous convictions. In mitigation, you are the youngest of the defendants, and you have a very low intellectual functioning, ADHD and autism spectrum disorder. I have read letters from your family.”

Sands appears close to tears with his bottom lip quivering as he is jailed for five years.

Judge Drive tells Ingle: ““You were not convicted of any offences in relation to the second weapon and are therefore are entitled to a shorter sentence for the firearms offences than your co-accused. In mitigation, I have read a letter from your girlfriend. The pre-sentence report finds that you present a high risk of harm to the public, and you have five previous convictions.”

Ingle is jailed for seven-and-a-half years, of which he must serve two thirds, and handed an extended licence period of two-and-a-half years.

Turning to Beverage, Judge Driver says: “In mitigation, there are letters I have read from your sister and yourself. You have a diagnosis of ADHD.

“Your pre-sentence report finds that you have a very high risk of significant harm to members of the public, and you have 26 previous convictions.”

Beverage is jailed for eight years and four months, of which he must serve at least two thirds, and handed an extended licence period of one year and eight months.

To Ford, Judge Driver says: “In mitigation there is a letter from your sister that shows the better side of your character. Your pre-sentence says you present a very high risk of serious harm to the pub and you have 20 previous convictions.”

Of the drug charges, the judge adds:

“This is your third set of qualifying convictions. The minimum term provisions apply. In my judgement, there are serious aggravating features. This is a conspiracy to supply class A drugs. One of your previous convictions was also a conspiracy, and you committed these offences when you were still on licence for your second qualifying conviction.”

Family members are seen wiping away tears, with one woman with her head in her hands, as Ford is given five years and eight months for the drug matters. He will be required to serve half of this sentence behind bars.

Ford will then serve a consecutive sentence of eight years, of which he must serve at least two thirds, and is handed an extended licence period of two years.

The judge continues his sentencing remarks: “I must consider whether any of Ford, Beverage and Ingle are dangerous offenders. The facts of count two are grave. As I have mentioned, two men were close to the path of the bullets which were discharged in a residential street. This city has a terrible history of innocent victims being hit by stray bullets.

“Count two is furthermore a conspiracy. Each of the first three defendants agreed that those three bullets should be fired in that place at that time and they participated in days of careful planning to do so. Although their intent was to cause fear of violence, each planned and agreed that this highly dangerous act would take place

“The pre-sentence report for each of those three finds that they present either a high or very high risk of serious harm to the public. I have reached the conclusion in each case that there is a significant risk that he will cause serious harm to members of the public by the commission of further specified offences in the future and, in each case, an extended determinate sentence is necessary for the protection of members of the public.”

Judge Driver: “On the 26th of July 2025, three bullets were fired from the Glock. Two were embedded in an alley gate in a residential street. We do not know where the third ended up.

“Shortly before the weapon was discharged, two men were standing near the open alley gates. Then they hid briefly and shortly after the discharge they reemerged. They must have been close when the bullets flew in their approximate direction.

“Maximium fear was intended, and there was significant planning. The circumstances I have just described created a high risk of death or serious injury and serious disorder. It is a prohibited weapon subject to the five year minimum term, and it was held with another weapon and ammunition.”

Judge Driver will now pass sentence, warning the public gallery “If there is any disorder I will have you arrested.”

The judge then continues: “This case involves two prohibited weapons. The first is a Glock self loading pistol. The defendants Ford, Beverage and Ingle are to be sentenced on count two, conspiracy to possess that with the intent of causing fear of violence, count three, conspiracy to possess it, and count five, conspiracy to possess ammunition. The fourth defendant, Sands, is to be sentenced only on count three, conspiracy to possess it.

“The second weapon is a Taurus revolver. The defendants Ford and Beverage are to be sentenced for count four, conspiracy to possess it and count five, conspiracy to possess ammunition In addition, the defendant Ford is to be sentenced for conspiracy to supply class A drugs.”

Lastly, Reynolds offers mitigation on behalf of Sands.

He says: “He was not party to the conspiracy to use the gun. I ask your honour to recognise that. During this time, he is in a McDonald’s with his girlfriend.

“The defendant ran a bike mechanic premises where the gun was stored. He had no knowledge of purposes. All he knew was that the gun was there. He is not to be sentenced for what was done with the firearm.

“He, by the by, while in custody suffered grievous bodily harm during the period when he was not aligning with others. I can say no more than that. Following the situation in custody, the defendant was keen to align. He has pleaded to being involved in a conspiracy to possess but not conspiracy to shoot at anyone in any circumstances.”

Ms Daley, defending Ingle, tells the court: “He is still only 27 years of age. He had been engaging with probation until he became involved in this offence in July 2025. He had been providing support to a partner.

“He is realistic. All that I can ask your honour to consider is that he does remain a relatively young man. He has a supportive family, parents that are both at court today, and he knows that he needs to change to be able to properly engage with them, because they disapprove of this lifestyle and those he was associating with.

“I submit that there is a potential for change. Since his remand, he is working. He simply wishes to use the time and serve his sentence and then be released. In all of those circumstances, I simply ask the court to keep the sentence as short as is possible.”

Mr Buckland speaks on behalf of Beverage next and says: “He only has one previous conviction for any offence of violence. That is an offence of battery and that is of some antiquity.”

Beverage’s counsel cites his ADHD and “lack of maturity” and adds: “Those are all matters I know your honour will weigh in the balance. Whilst there might be a risk, that can be addressed by the sentence that will be imposed and the serious crime prevention order that will no doubt follow.

“There is a note from Mr Beverage. It simply expresses an apology to the court for his behavior, his wishes for the future and how he intends to apply himself while he is in jail.”

Mr McNally will first offer mitigation on behalf of Ford.

He says: “In truth, there is little to be said in terms of what can be gleaned in mitigation from what is plainly serious offending. The court can proceed on the basis that the main incident was of an intimidatory nature, rather than having any more malevolent intent.

“The defendant refers to something which he considers to be something of sliding doors moment, a moment when he had the prospect of full time employment in Leeds. That would have taken him out of Liverpool. It would have given him legitimate employment.

“Regrteably, that was not employment that could be approved by the Probation Service. He remained where he was in Liverpool. He accepts that, frustrated with a variety of aspects of his life at that time, he allowed himself to be drawn back into a sphere he had been keen to escape.”

“Your honour sees expressions of remorse and realism. Mr Ford states he is aware that he has done wrong and has to pay the consequences.

“Emotionally, he is already paying the consequences of the recent period in his life. He lost his father during the currency of his last sentence. That weighs heavily. He feels he has let him down.

“He is a father himself now. He has a four-year-old son. He has felt the emotional impact of his young son coming to visit him in prison. It is a pain he feels keenly.

“A number of qualities that Mr Ford has, it is hoped, will allow him to find employment at the end of a sentence which will be significant. He has had difficulties obtaining employment but nonetheless has striven to do so in the past. This is a man whose antecedent history is not characterised by violence.”

Beverage has 17 previous convictions for 26 offences, including conspiracy to supply class B drugs in 2020.

Ingle’s criminal record shows three convictions for five “non-like” offences.

Sands has five earlier convictions for 18 offences, again including “no like offences”.

Police attended the farm the following day and recovered the grey BMW.

Ford’s DNA was detected on swabs taken from the steering wheel.

He has a total of 13 previous convictions for 20 offences, including possession of class A drugs with intent to supply in 2013 and being concerned in the supply of class A drugs in 2023.

Police executed a search warrant at Ford’s mum’s home on Lincoln Crescent on August 27 2025.

Ms Menary says: “When they turned up, Jonathan Ford’s mother called him immediately.”

A search of the bins then revealed a large Sports Direct bag containing a Glock self loading pistol, a Taurus revolver, a quantity of ammunition and class A drugs.

The Glock was later confirmed to be the weapon used in the shooting, with Sands’ DNA subsequently being found on an internal part of the firearm.

Ford’s DNA was meanwhile found on the magazine port and handle, as well as on the revolver.

Ingle’s DNA was discovered on the handle of the Sports Direct back, which was found to contain 596g of crack cocaine and 46.9g of heroin.

These drugs were set to have a “minimum value of around £50,000 at street level” and been “indicative of street dealing”, with the bin store being described as “clearly the stash house”.

The BMW then returned to the farm, arriving at around 10.50pm.

Ingle then turned his phone back on and unsuccessfully attempted three times to contact Sands.

The Hyundai subsequently arrived at Ford’s mother’s address on Lincoln Crescent in Kirkby.

With Ford having got out of the vehicle, he entered the house while Beverage and Ingle walked to a communal bin area.

Beverage was seen “carrying something in his front pocket”, although the “object was no longer there” when he then got back into the car.

At 11.19pm, Sands was again on the phone to Mr Rogers and “confirmed that the BMW had been dropped back off at the farm”.

Ms Menary says that the two unidentified males were later seen on CCTV besides the gate on Wulsten Street.

They were shown having “ducked down an alleyway” after passing through the gate after the BMW initially passed them.

Ms Menary adds: “As the car pulled up to the gates, the firearm was discharged from the car towards the open gate. Three bullets were discharged. Two became lodged in the metal gate, the other was lost. It is not clear which defendant fired the bullets. Minutes later, the two undefined mates came out and examined the damage caused by the gunshots.”

By 8.30pm, Ford, Beverage, Ingle and Sands were all together at the farm in order to coll the BMW, which had been “modified to make it completely unidentifiable”.

This involved affixing an Irish registration plate at the rear, with the front plate covered by a “thin layer of film that would obscure it to cameras”.

The BMW was thereafter seen leaving the farm as the Audi returned to Kirkby.

Beverage, Ford and Ingle were then seen travelling in the direction of Bickerstaffe at around 6.45pm in a Hyundai Santa Fe, that being a diesel vehicle.

The car was stopped at a BP garage en route, with Ford seen filling up a jerry can with £16 of petrol.

Sands’ Grey Audi A3 was also seen traveling in the direction of the farm at this time.

With Beverage having been collected, a phone call was placed to a man named Joshua Rogers.

Ms Menary says that he works at Walkden House Farm in Bickerstaffe, where the car used in the shooting was stored.

The car having arrived back in Liverpool, it was seen being driven down Stanley Road at around 6pm.

The prosecution counsel says: “As they were driving down Stanley Road, CCTV captured them passing Wulstan Road. As they did, the front seat passenger put his hand out the window and made a gun gesture.”

Ms Menary says that the “preparation for the shooting started some days earlier”, with Ford having made a booking for Beverage at a hotel in Birmingham for the night of July 25.

Beverage, Ingle and Ford were then said to have been “in constant contact” on the morning of July 26.

At around 11.30am, Beverage and Sands were said to have spoken over the phone for around five minutes before Sands contacted Ford and Ingle, “indicative of one thing, that their plan was in motion”.

By 2.30pm, Ford and Ingle were seen in a car on their way to Birmingham in order to collect Beverage.

The hotel booking was meanwhile extended for a further night in a “move designed to act as cover for the drive-by shooting”.

Ms Menary rises first and says: “On the 26th of July 2025 Jonathan Ford, Thomas Beverage and Keiran Ingle, in a stolen BMW, discharged a glock firearm firing three bullets at an open metal gate on Wulstan Street in Kirkdale . This is an area associated with the Flowers organised crime group.”

Ms Menary says that two men had been standing beside the gate “moments beforehand” when the BMW was driven past them before performing a U-turn, with the men having “dived behind the gate” as the shots were fired.

All the barristers are now in place, and the public gallery is filled with around 20 members of family.

Some are seen blowing kisses and waving as the defendants are brought into the court.

Ingle appears on the left of the dock, as we look at it, wearing a navy blue Nike t-shirt.

Next to him is Ford, who wears a navy blue Montirex tracksuit, with Sands to his left sporting a green Asics t-shirt.

Finally, on the far right of the dock is Beverage, wearing a grey Asics t-shirt.

Judge Driver enters the courtroom.

All four defendants, who are flanked by four guards, speak to confirm their names, and we are ready to begin.

Good morning from Liverpool Crown Court.

We’re in position in courtroom 52 now, with the case due to be called on imminently.

Just to run you through the various parties in the case.

Thomas Beverage, aged 25 and of Miranda Road South in Kirkdale, is defended by Matthew Buckland while 32-year-old Jonathon Ford, of Lincoln Crescent in Bootle, is represented by Stephen McNally.

Nicola Daley appears on behalf of 27-year-old Keiran Ingle, formerly of Alderney Road in Vauxhall, and Richard Reynolds defends 23-year-old Reece Sands, of Bigdale Drive in Kirkby.

Holly Menary represents the prosecution, while Judge Stuart Driver KC will be presiding over the case.