Southwell plastic surgeon Dr Peter Brooks given two life sentences at Loughborough Court hearing for the attempted murder of colleague Mr Graeme Perks by stabbing and arson at Halam home
A plastic surgeon found guilty of the attempted murder of his colleague has been handed two life sentences.
Dr Peter Brooks, 61, formerly of Landseer Road, Southwell, faced trial at Loughborough Court in March and April 2025, and was found guilty of two counts of attempted murder — by stabbing and arson — against his Nottingham University Hospitals colleague, consultant Mr Graeme Perks.
He was also found guilty of attempted arson with intent to endanger life, and possession of a bladed article in a public place.”
Today (June 9), he was sentenced to a life sentence with a minimum term on 17 years and 223 days (being 22 years, less the time that he has already served in custody) for each attempted murder charge, a six year prison sentence for attempted arson with intent, and 18 months imprisonment for possession of a bladed article.
All are to be served concurrently.
If his release is approved by a parole board after the minimum term, Brooks will spend the rest of his life on licence and will be subject to a restraining order preventing direct or indirect communication with the Perks family, and preventing him visiting Halam.
Presiding judge, Mr Justice Pepperall, said: “I have no doubt you present a severe risk to the public, particularly Graeme Perks.”
Describing Brooks’ “murderous expedition”, Judge Pepperall said he was certain the former surgeon was intent to murder his colleague, and had deliberately armed himself for this purpose.
He added: “You were fixated on your employment difficulties… you blamed Mr Perks for your troubles.
“I am sure that your simmering sense of grievance developed into deep anger.”
In the early hours of January 14, 2021, Brooks, dressed in camouflage and thermal underwear, loaded his bicycle with fuel, a crowbar, knife, matches, and a lighter, and cycled from his Southwell home to the Perks’ Halam Hill home, with an intention to kill his former colleague and risk the lives of his family in the house.
He broke in through the glass conservatory doors and doused much of the ground floor and staircase of the home in a flammable petrol mixture, which Judge Pepperall said: “Had that fuel been lit it would have caused an intense and catastrophic fire.
“I am certain you had the means and the settled intent to light that fuel.”
When disturbed by Mr Perks, he then stabbed his former colleague in the abdomen, causing an injury which left Mr Perks with just a 5% chance of survival, having pierced multiple organs, his inferior vena cava, and caused significant blood loss.
He required three surgeries and a number of blood transfusions to recover from the injury.
Judge Pepperall had said it was only due to the actions of Mr Perks’ wife and son, the paramedics, and the trauma centre surgical team, that it was not a murder trial.
In his victim impact statement, read out in court by prosecution counsel, Mr Perks described the attack as an “unimaginable catastrophe for two families” and a “nightmare” for his wife Beverley and son Henry who were present at the time.
He said it was “beyond every struggle in [his and Mrs Perks’] life so far”.
The life-threatening attack left him, a formerly fit and healthy man, having to learn to walk again, on life-long medication, lacking the levels of physical fitness he’d previously enjoyed, and with curtailed plans for his retirement.
Due to covid-19 restrictions at the time, the court heard from multiple family members — including the Perks’ two other children — about how they’d not been able to be together in the immediate aftermath of the incident.
Two of their children had had to self-isolate in friends’ homes and garages until they could be reunited, and Mrs Perks had been unable to visit her seriously injured husband in hospital during his initial recovery.
The events of January 14, brought back during subsequent court appearances, have also caused the family to experience night terrors, left them afraid of the dark, and affected their personal lives and careers.
Mrs Perks’ victim impact statement described how she could “recall vividly the inescapable smell of fuel” and “agonizes” that the attack may reoccur.
Brooks had not been in attendance throughout his trial, had sacked his lawyers one day before it was due to start and instead elected to represent himself — but chose not to cooperate with the court to provide any evidence for the defence case.
It was the fifth time he had sacked one or more of his lawyers, causing the trial to be delayed on multiple occasions, and since February Brooks had maintained a hunger strike, refused to attend court, and claimed he would “rather die than be wrongly convicted”.
He appeared once via video link asking to postpone the trial, which was not permitted.
These delays “only add to the pain and suffering [Brooks] has inflicted”, Henry Perks’ statement said — adding that he believed it was a cynical attempt by Brooks to lengthen his time on remand to reduce his sentence.
He described Brooks as “nothing more than a bully” who is highly dangerous, has no morals, and lacks remorse.
Mr Perks’ statement added: “I have no ill feelings or hatred to my former colleague. I take no pleasure in the guilty verdict.
“I wish his family well.
“I find it ironic that a burns surgeon should want to immolate our family.”
He stated he would be ‘forever grateful’ it was him and not his wife or son who had been stabbed.
The family also thanked the hospital staff and emergency services for their care following the stabbing.
Prosecutor Ms Tracey Ayling KC suggested the culpability for both cases of attempted murder was high due to the planned use of fire, and the use of a knife.
She said: “[Mr Perks’] whole family has been affected.
“This has been devastating for the entire family.”
She suggested the only mitigation was Brooks’ lack of previous offences, and also highlighted that a court-ordered psychiatric report had concluded Brooks was sill at a “high risk” of violence, which could be “life threatening”.
She said he showed evidence of planning the offences due to the petrol mixture which was used, as well as his choice of clothing — and suggested his behaviour with the court shows he is “manipulative” and that he “shows no remorse for his actions”.
“The defendant generally refuses to co-operate with those with whom he disagrees,” she added.
His cancellations of appointments, criticisms of his work disciplinary hearing, hunger strikes, and sacking of his legal team were given as examples.
However, representing Brooks, Mr Stephen Leslie KC said: “[There’s] nothing to suggest a degree of pre-planning … this was a single occasion of violence.”
He said he’d had an ordinary day with his family prior to the attack, and something must have “triggered him in the night”.
He suggested the petrol was a normal item to have in a garage due to his interest in motorbikes, and Brooks’ dress was appropriate for the snowy weather on the night.
Mr Leslie further said Brooks was “beginning to show some remorse” as he’d told the psychiatrist he accepted he “may have done things that were not appropriate”.
Brooks’ lengthy medicine career and charitable efforts were also highlighted, and Mr Leslie added: “He’s done a lot of good in the world and helped many people over many years
“Although he must be seriously punished… he should be provided with a chance to reform himself.
“There is still good in him.
“You can really tender some mercy in this case.”
In his sentencing Judge Pepperall acknowledged Brooks’ previous good character, and his mild Autism diagnosis — but said it did “not even start to explain or excuse” his crimes.
While no sign of mental illness was found, he noted that Brooks’ “life was falling apart” at the time of the incident.
However, he also detailed Brooks’ refusals to attend his sentencing in person despite him being ordered to do so, and his refusal to engage with the probation team to produce a pre-sentencing report on his “dangerousness”.
“After waiting so long for justice the Perks family are entitled to have this case concluded today,” the judge said, addressing Brooks.
“There’s no reason to think you’d co-operate if the sentencing was adjourned.
“I am satisfied Graeme Perks is a deeply impressive man… he is a decent and compassionate man, a much-loved husband and father.
“It is a mark of the man he is that he bears you no ill feeling, hatred, or bitterness.
“While he has suffered terribly at your hand, he has had the compassion to recognise this case is a tragedy for both families.”
