The possible journey a suspect took to and from the scene where a teenager was stabbed to death in broad daylight has been scrutinized in court.

Alfie Hammett, 19, and Joshua Howell, 18, have both been charged with the murder of Raymond James Quigley on January 17 last year in Westgate Street, as well as possession of an offensive weapon in a public place.

Hammett, of Larkhill Rise, Rushmere St Andrew, and Howell, of Wellington Street, Ipswich, both deny the charges and are on trial.

Police Constable Chittock gave an account to Ipswich Crown Court of the path the police expect the suspect they have called ‘Male 1’ to have taken.

This was done using footage from CCTV and doorbell cameras along with tracking data from the moped of Hammett who the prosecution say is Male 1.

PC Chittock told the court he has personally retraced the route and the jury was shown body camera footage of where he had gone.

The prosecution argues Hammett drove his moped to Bishops Hill from Larkhill Rise where he parked and later met with Howell.

Then following the stabbing he went back from the Cornhill to Bishops Hill and drove back to his address at Larkhill Rise.

Specifically, the prosecution has said at 2.14pm Hammett left his house. He drove to the Nacton area of Ipswich and stopped there. It is alleged at 2.24pm Hammett got back on the moped travelling towards Felixstowe Road. Then the moped arrived at Bishops Hill.

The prosecution then claim Hammett and Howell then met in the grounds of Suffolk New College at 3.12pm.

Then together the court heard they went to the Buttermarket then towards the Cornhill and Westgate Street where they encountered Mr Quigley and his two friends at 3.35pm.

Prosecutor Andrew Jackson said Hammett stabbed Mr Quigley then made his way back to the college and went towards Alexandra Park.

He then went towards Felixstowe Road before returning to Bishops Hill at 4.11pm, arriving back at his home in Larkhill Rise at 4.24pm.

However defence barrister for Hammett, Stephen Rose KC cross examined PC Chittock and highlighted to the court that the recreation of the route was based on the assumption that Male 1 was the same person throughout all the footage.

The expected journey is not completely filled in with CCTV so some parts have been based on what police say is the most likely path male 1 would have taken, the court heard.

The case continues.