“Both you and your victim were heroin addicts.”

Clark admitted at the High Court in Edinburgh last month that he murdered Mr McDade at his home in Brown Constable Street on January 17 by repeatedly striking him with a knife.

The Crown told the High Court in Edinburgh that both men sold the Big Issue on Dundee’s streets, “Partly to fund their addictions.”

The prosecutor said that on the day before the killing Clark sold some of his grandmother’s furniture without his family’s knowledge, to raise money to buy drugs.

That sale raised £180 and he gave some of the money to Paddy McDade to buy heroin. They took some of the drugs before returning to the city centre.

Clark, who had been living in homeless accommodation, later gave him the rest of the money to get more drugs and went to Mr McDade’s home.

Advocate Depute Iain McSporran said, “Mr McDade advised the accused he’d given the money to a third party to procure the drugs but that party made off with the money.”

Former Arbroath man Paddy McDade was found dead in his flat by his father on January 23, six days after he had been killed in the argument over what happened to the drug money.

Clark was questioned by police interviewing friends and associates of the victim.

He gave a statement claiming he had bought drugs with Paddy and had last seen him on the streets of Dundee on January 17.

Forensic examination of the Brown Constable Street flat focused on a high visibility jacket found to have Clark’s DNA on it. He was traced again and, during a break, he began to cry and became distressed.

The Advocate Depute told the court, “He explained he had overheard the deceased speaking to another party in Dundee in terms which made it clear there was no truth in the account he gave of having lost the accused’s money to someone else.”

Clark said he decided to visit Paddy McDade, but they got into an argument and he picked up the knife.

He told police, “The next minute I realised what I had done and I sat there till the next day.”

In mitigation Defence Counsel Mark Stewart QC commended what he said was a favourable social inquiry report expressing Clark’s remorse for what had happened.

Mr Stewart said the factual background given to the court was agreed by the defence and continued, “This whole incident appears to have begun as a result of tension between the accused and the deceased.

“They were friends and it was in relation to that, money was handed over. At each stage of the issue which developed between these two men, the accused sought to avoid any confrontation.

“There was a degree of goading on behalf of the deceased that suggests the accused, not in the legal sense, but in the moral sense, was provoked.”

Mr Stewart said that what followed was, “clearly out of character for this accused”.

Counsel asked the judge to take into consideration that Clark had made a full admission of his involvement and had authorised the case to be brought to a conclusion in the High Court “as speedily as he could”.

Passing sentence, Lord Brailsford said, “This crime was perpetrated by the use of considerable force and involved the use of a knife with which 24 injuries were inflicted on the victim.

“Of these wounds, three were particularly severe and, individually, each would have proved fatal.

“Three other wounds were deep and penetrated the victim’s lung. These wounds alone were life-threatening.

“As I have said, this was a murderous attack of considerable ferocity.

“The result of the attack was the death of a young man, tragic for the victim, but also a tragedy for his parents and other family members.

“It was plain this was a very serious crime and must be dealt with by the court accordingly.

“Having noted the extremely serious nature of this crime, I should

further state that this is yet another example of the tragedy and degradation brought upon individuals by the abuse of drugs.

“The circumstances giving rise to this crime arose directly from that addiction.”

Recalling that he had been told that Clark obtained money “deceitfully” by selling his grandmother’s furniture to use to buy heroin, the judge said, “You gave some of it to your victim for this purpose and he tricked you out of the money to fund the purchase of drugs.

“When you found out you had been duped, you became irrationally angry with your victim and attacked him with, as I have noted, fatal consequences.

“I acknowledge that you used a knife that came to hand as you perpetrated the crime — you did not go to the crime scene armed.

“I acknowledge that there are a number of powerful mitigating features in this case, as pointed out by Mr Stewart.

“It is apparent from the very favourable social background report that you are genuinely remorseful.

“You have used your time on remand productively and are now drug free.

Co-operated

“It is your stated intention to use your time in prison constructively.

“Most importantly, you have, from an early stage, co-operated with the authorities.

“You admitted your guilt to the police. You pled guilty at a preliminary hearing. These factors have a clear value to the administration of justice.

“The sentence which I require to pass as a matter of law in a case of murder is one of life imprisonment and I now impose that sentence.”

The judge was interrupted by a cry of “yes” from the public benches where Mr McDade’s family was sitting.

Lord Brailsford continued, “I also have to fix the punishment part, that is the minimum period you will require to serve in prison before you are eligible to be considered for release on licence.

“Having regard to the ferocity of the attack and the use of a weapon, I would have fixed that period at 15 years, but for your co-operation and early plea.

“To give you the credit I am required by law to give you for that early plea, I reduce the punishment part to a period of 11 years and three months.”

Family members, some in tears, declined to comment after sentence was passed.