GUILTY UK - Hashim Ijazuddin, 21, and Saqib Hussain, 20, car crash A46 Leicester 11 Feb 2022 *Murder Arrests*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

The cars park and Mohammed Patel walks home​

The next sequence of CCTV clips showed the vehicles return to Leicester via Humberstone Lane, Gipsy Lane and Sutton Avenue before turning into Sutton Place, where all eight defendents leave the cars and go off on foot, with Mohammed Patel the first to split from the group, walking back to his home in Braybrooke Road, caught by several cameras on his way home at about 2am.

CCTV shows other seven at junciton of Gipsy Lane and Catherine Street​

While Mohammed Patel is walking home alone, the other seven also go on foot from Sutton Place, walking down to the junction of Gipsy Lane and Catherine Street.


We lack a lot of information of course, but imo a picture's emerging, both from his testimony and his actions, of Mohammed Patel as not having expected things to unfold as they did and wanting no part of it. He can't undo his involvement after the event, but imo he's the most likely of them to end up with a lesser conviction than murder.

JMO/NAL
 

One defendant returned to the cars in Sutton Place​

After the group of seven moved off on foot, two members of the group split off and headed back to Sutton Avenue, with one of them heading along Wakefield Place and taking an alleyway that goes onto Catherine Street, where defendant Ammeer Jamal lives. The second figure returns to where the cars are parked in Sutton Place, which is a small cul-de-sac just off Sutton Avenue.


Group of defendants still on foot at 3am​

About 90 minutes after the fatal crash on the A46, six of the defendants - those other than Ammeer Jamal and Mohammed Patel in the prosecution's case - are still walking in a group around the city, heading back towards Sutton Place where the cars are both parked after five of them had been spending time in the Northfield Road area.
It's not clear what happened to the five in Northfields Road, Mr Thompson said, because there was no CCTV footage from that area. It's not clear whether they went into a house or just stayed outside, he said.

 
I appreciate this forum since it provided me with the solution I required without me having to ask. I appreciate how helpful everyone is to one another. I appreciate you sharing this.
Welcome to the forum @AliArsalan, and please join in the discussion, its a very sad case, do you think all 8 defendants will be found guilty of murder? Im not sure yet.
 

Audi and Seat separate and go in different directions​

The Audi TT and the Seat Leon both leave Sutton Place at about 3.22am and they turn off in opposite directions into Sutton Avenue. The Audi, belonging to Mahek Bukhari, is seen on CCTV going up Catherine Street to Gipsy Lane and parking near to the junction with Tomlin Road, where defendant Rekan Karwan lived. A person is seen walking off towards Tomlin Road.
The Audi then heads along Gipsy Lane and Victoria Road East to get back to the city's outer ring road.

Where the Seat Leon went next​

The Seat Leon turned out of Sutton Place and went to Littlemore Close in Crown Hills where the defedant Sanaf Gulammustafa lived. After stopping there at about 3.30am it headed back towards Loughborough, where Raees Jamal lived in Lingdale Close.
After that, Akhtar drives the Seat Leon back to Birmingham but gets arrested at a petrol station on the M6 as she makes her way home after an ANPR camera spotted her.
 

End of the CCTV evidence​

Det Con Burgess has now finished giving his CCTV presentation. The final clip shows Mahek Bukhari's silver Audi TT arriving back at her home in Stoke. The car is reversed back into the driveway, caught on the family's own CCTV camera, arriving at 3.38am. The two occupants get out of the car at 4.40am.
Now the lawyers for the eight defendants will get a chance to ask questions in cross examination. The first to ask questions of the officer is Christopher Millington KC, the barrister for Mahek Bukhari, who is asking about the CCTV footage from Tesco in Hamilton.

Det Con Burgess challenged on whether the CCTV shows the Skoda being "boxed in"​

Mark Rainsford KC, acting for Rekan Karwan, asks about the footage of the three cars travelling up the A46. He suggests the footage, showing the Seat Leon at the front of the queue braking, is not consistent with the Crown's case that the other two cars were trying to box the Skoda in. But Det Con Burgess disagrees and says it is.
 

Four defendants sold phones and bought new ones​

The other prosecution barrister, Daren Samat, begins reading out some more witness statements. The jury has been instructed by the judge to place just as much importance on statements as 'live' witnesses in the trial. The reason some people's statements are being read is because none of the other lawyers want to ask them any questions or challenge their evidence in any way.
The first statement is from Amin Ali Muhammad, who owns a shop in Leicester called AA Communications and Accessories. The jury has already heard how - according to the prosecution - four of the male defendants went to see Amin to get new phones the day before the night of the crash. Ali said one of the four men returned with his new phone the next day and switched it again for another new phone.
Two of the phones that were sold to him were handed over to the police while the others had already been sold on.
 

Four defendants sold phones and bought new ones​

The other prosecution barrister, Daren Samat, begins reading out some more witness statements. The jury has been instructed by the judge to place just as much importance on statements as 'live' witnesses in the trial. The reason some people's statements are being read is because none of the other lawyers want to ask them any questions or challenge their evidence in any way.
The first statement is from Amin Ali Muhammad, who owns a shop in Leicester called AA Communications and Accessories. The jury has already heard how - according to the prosecution - four of the male defendants went to see Amin to get new phones the day before the night of the crash. Ali said one of the four men returned with his new phone the next day and switched it again for another new phone.
Two of the phones that were sold to him were handed over to the police while the others had already been sold on.
4 new phones the day before the crash??

I had thought it was after. Was this really planned ahead? I don't mean the crash, but an event that would require evading police detection.
 
Last edited:

Statement reveals more about the first arrest​

Natasha Akhtar was the first defendant to be arrested, less than three hours after the fatal crash.
A statement read out by Mr Samat was from Pc Martyn Carpenter of West Midlands Police who arrested Akhtar after spotting her Seat Leon approaching Birmingham, where she lived, at 4.20am on the night of the crash. Pc Carpenter said: "We were made aware of an incident in the Six Hills area of Leicester. Two vehicles were identified - one of which was a blue Seat Leon registered in the Birmingham area.
"The Seat Leon seen turning from the M42 onto the M6. We saw the Seat Leon as it was heading towards the Washwood Heath area. The Seat Leon pulled into a petrol station on Washwood Heath Road.
"I stopped our police car close to the rear bumper as another police vehicle blocked the vehicle from the front. Natasha Akhtar gave her address. She was placed in the rear of the vehicle and due to information received from Leicestershire I said, 'You are under arrested on suspicion of murder'"
 

Bodycam footage shows Mahek and her mum being interviewed in living room​

Next, the jury was read a statement by Pc Gary Scott of Staffordshire Police who arrested Mahek Bukhari and her mother, Ansreen. He described arriving at their home in Stoke to spot the Audi TT in the driveway, which was the second of the two cars the police had already linked to the fatal collision just hours earlier. Pc Scott described waiting outside the house for backup before knocking on the door.
He said: "We attended a property in George Eardley Close. The Audi TT was in the driveway. We needed the attendance of more officers so we waited until they arrived.
"The door was answered by a man I now know to be Ali Raza. I asked who had been driving the Audi and he said his wife and daughter had been out in the caar during the night."
He interviewed the whole family - Mahek, her parents Ansreen and Ali Raza and her brother. Bodycam footage shown to the jury showed the two women in their bedclothes talking to the police. A police officer is heard to ask where the women had been in the car and Mahek was heard to reply: "First we stayed here then we went straight to Nottingham".
The jury had already heard that the Audi TT was actually on loan to the family after their car had been rammed by a neighbour. The loan car had a telemetry computer that meant police were able to obtain full details of its location and speed, which had been transmitted every few seconds.
Pc Scott said: "I told them 'You're both under arrest for the murder of an unknown person'. The females were in bedclothes so I requested female officer to attend as they changed."
Both women handed over their phones before going to change. They were then taken to a local police station.
 
4 new phones the day before the crash??

I had thought it was after. Was this really planned ahead? I don't mean the crash, but an event that would require evading police detection.
It can't be a coincidence surely !! I wonder who the one male is who didnt change his phone....

Yeah, this is an inconsistency, presumably in the reporting rather than the evidence the prosecution is presenting.

The four that went to the shop were Raees and Ameer Jamal, Rekan Karwan and Mohammed Patel. The one that didn't was Sanaf Gulamustafa. I haven't seen any mention of which defendant swapped his phone a second time.

It was reported after the prosecution's opening statement that the phones were replaced after the incident, whereas now on day 4 it explicitly says this happened during the day before the night of the crash.

OPENING: Court updates of murder trial of TikTok star Mahek Bukhari

DAY 4: Murder trial of Mahek Bukhari - court updates of day 4

We would need to find another source to get a steer on which is correct but unfortunately all the live updating is coming from a single reporter and then being syndicated out to a number of local titles. Most of the national MSM are days behind.

It makes a huge difference in evaluating premeditation!
 
Akhtar and the bukharis were arrested on the 12th February. And Raees Jamal and Rekan Karwan weren't brought in for questioning until 14th February, and the others were at later dates. I think you are right it's probably an error in reporting and I think they changed their phones after the event. And maybe one of the males went back again after raees and rekan got taken in.

Do you really need a physical phone to get it's data though? Youd think in this day in age a few clickity clicks on some computer you could get the data. The good thing is, we know the police have the 3 women's phones.
 

Drove past the car 'already on fire'​

The court is hearing from the boss and colleague of one of the defendants Mr Ammeer Jamal. The prosecution witness told the court: "I tried ringing him [on the date in question] but there was no response. I then received a call from his girlfriend. I was told he wouldn't be in work that day. I next saw him on the Tuesday. I spoke to him about his time keeping.
"We spoke about bits of the incident which happened [on the A46]. I don't know the order but got a call from his cousin asking him if he wanted to go out for a ride, which he did. They went to Tesco car park. They drove off and another car followed.
"They went past the Lamborghini dealership and one of the vehicles hit the car and crashed. He was in the Seat. His cousin was in driver's seat. Friend in the front and girl next to him.
"They drove up and came past the car. They carried driving on the A46 and came past the car. It was already on fire. The friend in the passenger seat had a wheel brace. I'm not sure if anything was done with the wheel brace. When I asked him why he didn't stop, he said he couldn't because he could feel the heat from his car."

Wheel brace 'used to break window'​

The witness continued: "The wheel brace was being used to break the window of the Skoda. I didn't know why he [Mr Ammeer Jamal] got a new mobile phone [following the crash]. Mr Jamal looked no different and seemed himself. His demeanour was no different. We worked really well together."
 

Defendant worked in Leicester​

Mr Ammeer Jamal worked at a parts dealership in Leicester. He worked there full time up until he was arrested in March this year. The witness worked with Mr Jamal for seven to eight years. The pair 'had a good working relationship', the court was told.
Apart from "falling asleep at work", Mr Jamal was "hard working". The court heard Mr Jamal and his colleague socialised together.

Mr Jamal would 'initiate conversations' about the crash​

Conversations [about the crash] between the colleagues were initiated by Ammeer Jamal but sometimes his boss would bring up the case. "I can't remember initiating conversions, apart from maybe once, yes', Mr Jamal's colleague replied. Adding: "These were conversations during the working day. I didn't make note what was said."
"When I spoke to the police about this, I was speaking about the overall picture on the multiple occasions we spoke about the A46 crash. The police contacted me to ask if Mr Jamal had said anything about the A46 incident."
 

SEAT back seat passenger​

The 27-year-old defendant Ammeer Jamal told his boss about 'three cars' but the colleague admits he knows about the make and model of the Skoda following newspaper articles on the crash. The defendant had admitted being the back-seat passenger in the SEAT, driven by his cousin. "He told me the SEAT being driven by his cousin, hit the back of the car with the two people in it," he added. "Four people were in that SEAT vehicle and the owner of the vehicle was in the back seat, that is correct, yes."
Mr Jamal's demeanour was described as looking solemn when talking about the crash. His colleague said: "His face would drop and [it would be like] something heavy would be playing on his mind."

Presence of wheel brace?​

Mr Jamal's colleague told the court: "The wheel brace was definitely there, mentioned, as I have previously mentioned, yes. I didn't believe that Mr Jamal was in the [SEAT] car from the start when he told me."
 

'Advised him to go to the police'​

The colleague told the court: "I advised him [Mr Jamal] to go to the police. [With] The conversations and information he was telling me but when I was hearing more of that is when I told him to go to the police."

'Hot' courtroom​

Barristers in court have been given the go-ahead to remove their wigs due to the 'hot' temperatures in court. There is a short break before the next witness takes to the witness box.

LOL @ hot courtroom !

 

'Advised him to go to the police'​

The colleague told the court: "I advised him [Mr Jamal] to go to the police. [With] The conversations and information he was telling me but when I was hearing more of that is when I told him to go to the police."

'Hot' courtroom​

Barristers in court have been given the go-ahead to remove their wigs due to the 'hot' temperatures in court. There is a short break before the next witness takes to the witness box.

LOL @ hot courtroom !

probably overcrowding with all the defendants in the dock, all the guards needed to watch them, and 8 legal teams! :D

I suppose it's 9 legal teams with the prosecution as well
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
3,168
Total visitors
3,325

Forum statistics

Threads
602,626
Messages
18,143,962
Members
231,464
Latest member
HazardPay
Back
Top