This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22611116

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
April Jones trial: Mark Bridger defence case due to begin April Jones trial: Mark Bridger giving evidence
(about 2 hours later)
The defence case in the trial of the man accused of murdering five-year-old April Jones is expected to begin later. A man accused of murdering five-year-old April Jones appeared emotional as he started giving evidence in his defence at Mold Crown Court.
Mark Bridger, 47, of Ceinws, Powys, denies abducting and murdering April, who went missing near her Machynlleth home on 1 October 2012.Mark Bridger, 47, of Ceinws, Powys, denies abducting and murdering April, who went missing near her Machynlleth home on 1 October 2012.
He claims he accidentally ran her over in his Land Rover and cannot remember what he did with her body because he was drunk and panicked.He claims he accidentally ran her over in his Land Rover and cannot remember what he did with her body because he was drunk and panicked.
Her disappearance sparked the biggest police search in UK history. The prosecution case has now concluded.
April has never been found. Mr Bridger has now been sworn in and has started giving evidence.
April's disappearance sparked the biggest police search in UK history.
She has never been found.
The prosecution claims the defendant murdered April after abducting her as she played near her home on the Bryn-Y-Gog estate.The prosecution claims the defendant murdered April after abducting her as she played near her home on the Bryn-Y-Gog estate.
The prosecution case is due to formally conclude later and Mr Bridger's defence case is expected to start. On Wednesday, Mr Bridger spoke for the first time in court as he was sworn in.
He stumbled over his words and he appeared emotional. He was told to speak loudly and clearly.
His defence barrister, Brendan Kelly QC, said there would be a number of topics discussed, starting with Mr Bridger's background.
The defendant said he was born in Surrey and had an older sister and younger brother.
He said he was in the fire service for less than a year and was asked why he left, responding: "I had personal problems, I had split up with my partner at the time... we had just had a baby."
One security guard sat immediately next to Mr Bridger, another at the entrance to the witness box.
On Tuesday, the court heard from bone analysis specialist Dr Julie Roberts who said bone fragments found in Mr Bridger's fireplace were from a human skull.On Tuesday, the court heard from bone analysis specialist Dr Julie Roberts who said bone fragments found in Mr Bridger's fireplace were from a human skull.
She compared one of the five fragments with that of a skull belonging to a child aged about four to eight years old.She compared one of the five fragments with that of a skull belonging to a child aged about four to eight years old.
Dr Roberts also told the jury the skull had been put in the fire "as fragments".Dr Roberts also told the jury the skull had been put in the fire "as fragments".
She said of one fragment: "It's burnt to a sufficiently high temperature whereby all the organic material has gone, so it's completely combusted."She said of one fragment: "It's burnt to a sufficiently high temperature whereby all the organic material has gone, so it's completely combusted."
For the defence, Brendan Kelly QC cast doubt on Dr Roberts' conclusions and said one internationally-renowned expert in the field, Prof Susan Black, had disputed the prosecution's findings.For the defence, Brendan Kelly QC cast doubt on Dr Roberts' conclusions and said one internationally-renowned expert in the field, Prof Susan Black, had disputed the prosecution's findings.
Prof Black told the court there was no scientific evidence to conclude that one of the fragments had come from a juvenile skull.Prof Black told the court there was no scientific evidence to conclude that one of the fragments had come from a juvenile skull.