- Joined
- Oct 14, 2022
- Messages
- 428
- Reaction score
- 3,114
Yeah, weird to humiliate her like that because he seems to be trying to protect her by saying she knew nothing and was in the back and couldn’t hear what was being said.
Strange
Strange
GUILTY UK - Hashim Ijazuddin, 21, and Saqib Hussain, 20, car crash A46 Leicester 11 Feb 2022 *Murder Arrests*
- Thread starter Tortoise
- Start date
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
Jamal challenged over another sentence in his defence case statement
In his statement to the court before the trial, Jamal's lawyers said: "Immediatley prior to the accident the defendant was overtaking the Skoda to get the Skoda to stop. The Skoda was driving erratically and as a result of the manoeuvre, the Skoda came into contact with the Seat and lost control, which led to the tragic accident."Jamal has said again that the only contact between the cars was near the Shell petrol station, well ahead of the Skoda leaving the road.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
Prosecutor begins cross-examination of Raees Jamal
Collingwood Thompson KC is next to cross-examine the defendant. He asked Jamal about the 999 call in which Saqib mentions balaclavas and then asked about the CCTV clip that appeared to show them wearing balaclavas. Jamal said: "Like I said, none of us wore balaclavas."Mr Thompson said: "You were wearing balaclavas. And you haven't told the truth about the incidents leading up to the collision with the Skoda, have you?"
He refered to the defence case statement about how there was a collision between the Skoda and the Seat "immediately" before the fatal crash.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
Contact 'didn't lead to crash', despite what defence case statement said
Mr Thompson is pressing Jamal on his lawyer's statement and why it differs from what he's telling the jury. Mr Thompson said: "What you're saying [in the signed statement] is the contact between your car and the Skoda Fabia caused the Skoda to lose control. It says the loss of control resulted from the car coming into contact with the front of the Seat."Jamal apologised for the statement not giving the correct impression of what happened. He replied: "It's kept brief and I should have mentioned that, I'm sorry."
'Only one' contact between Skoda and Seat
The prosecutor asked Jamal about a comment he made in his evidence in which he described as a position on the road that was the point of "first contact" between the cars before correcting himself and saying it was the only point of contact.Mr Thompson accused Jamal of saying "first point of contact" because there were several other collisions but Jamal denied that.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 14,024
- Reaction score
- 61,203
snipped from post 313
Jamal also said that the collision he had with the Skoda - which, he said, happened a while befofe the fatal collision - was not the kind of collision that someone in the back would have noticed.
He said that he and the others in his car, including Akhtar, only became aware that the Skoda had crashed after they were heading back to Leicester and saw the vehicle on flames.
It was a Seat - of course they would * notice *
Jamal also said that the collision he had with the Skoda - which, he said, happened a while befofe the fatal collision - was not the kind of collision that someone in the back would have noticed.
He said that he and the others in his car, including Akhtar, only became aware that the Skoda had crashed after they were heading back to Leicester and saw the vehicle on flames.
It was a Seat - of course they would * notice *
This is just so bizarre. Surely those denying any knowledge of balaclavas should be asked to try and explain this when there’s cctv. Unless it’s not great quality?
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2015
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 1,242
No expert here but I really do think that Raees Jamal should have stuck to his original statement about the Skoda driving into him just before the crash. That would have at least left some doubt.Contact 'didn't lead to crash', despite what defence case statement said
Mr Thompson is pressing Jamal on his lawyer's statement and why it differs from what he's telling the jury. Mr Thompson said: "What you're saying [in the signed statement] is the contact between your car and the Skoda Fabia caused the Skoda to lose control. It says the loss of control resulted from the car coming into contact with the front of the Seat."
Jamal apologised for the statement not giving the correct impression of what happened. He replied: "It's kept brief and I should have mentioned that, I'm sorry."
'Only one' contact between Skoda and Seat
The prosecutor asked Jamal about a comment he made in his evidence in which he described as a position on the road that was the point of "first contact" between the cars before correcting himself and saying it was the only point of contact.
Mr Thompson accused Jamal of saying "first point of contact" because there were several other collisions but Jamal denied that.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddinwww.leicestermercury.co.uk
To say on the stand that a collision happened way before the crash near a shell garage is quite pacific. Two totally different storeys that show a great amount of dishonestly.
I know that are all trying their best not to mention any intention of harm that night but everything is against them at the moment. IMO
IMO
Contact 'didn't lead to crash', despite what defence case statement said
Mr Thompson is pressing Jamal on his lawyer's statement and why it differs from what he's telling the jury. Mr Thompson said: "What you're saying [in the signed statement] is the contact between your car and the Skoda Fabia caused the Skoda to lose control. It says the loss of control resulted from the car coming into contact with the front of the Seat."
Jamal apologised for the statement not giving the correct impression of what happened. He replied: "It's kept brief and I should have mentioned that, I'm sorry."
'Only one' contact between Skoda and Seat
The prosecutor asked Jamal about a comment he made in his evidence in which he described as a position on the road that was the point of "first contact" between the cars before correcting himself and saying it was the only point of contact.
Mr Thompson accused Jamal of saying "first point of contact" because there were several other collisions but Jamal denied that.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
Changing your story on such a key part of the evening in question does not look great in terms of credibility.
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
'Why change drivers if you didn't see crash?'
Jamal has said that he saw the Skoda go into the central reservation and thought it had just gone onto the opposite carriageway. Mr Thompson asked why he felt the need to switch driving with Natasha Akhtar if he hadn't witnessed the fatal collision.Jamal tells the jury: "I didn't want to drive because of what had just happened." Mr Thompson asked: "And what had just happened?"
Jamal said he thought the car had crossed over to the other side of the carriageway but add that he thought the car might have gone into a barrier.
Mr Thompson said: "If it had gone into the air and crashed into the bushes it would have been in a pretty serious accident."
Jamal replied that he was "shaken" by what happened and "didn't think everything would be alright". He said: "They possibly could have got into an accident."
The 14 minute phone call during the chase
Jamal was asked by Mr Thompson about the 14-minute call between the two cars. Mr Thompson asked if Jamal was talking to Rekan Karwan, driving the Audi TT, so they could "co-ordinate the movements of the two vehicles" so they could block the Skoda in.Jamal denied the Audi was involved in trying to block the Skoda and said he was talking to Mohammed Patel and not Rekan Karwan.
Mr Thompson then asked if he was "trying to force [the Skoda] to stop" and Jamal agreed that he was. Mr Thompson said: "That meant the driver of the Skoda would be taking evasive action if he didn't want to stop?" Jamal agreed that was true.
'Bored with Leicester'
Raees Jamal has insisted he only invited the others out to socialise together - not to have superior numbers for the Tesco meeting. Jamal claims he only heard about Mahek and Ansreen's blackmail problem while he was outside Rekan Karwan's home in Tomlin Road.But before that, at 12.27pm on February 11, Jamal phoned Mohammed Patel. He told the jury: "I called him out to chill. I was just seeing what he was doing."
He said they were planning on going out "to chill out of town" because he was "bored with Leicester".
Why didn't statement mention wheel brace?
Mr Thompson asked Jamal why he never mentioned in his defence case statement being asked by Mohammed Patel for a "tool" to use for protection. Jamal replied: "To cover myself. It might get me in trouble."Mr Thompson said: "You were in trouble already." Jamal replied: "Yeah, I know."
'Never heard "tooled up"'
Mr Thompson questioned Jamal about the wheel brace he had given Mohammed Patel. Mr Thompson asked: "What does the expression 'tooled up' mean to you?"Jamal replied: "I've never heard it. I wouldn't know".
He admitted he had given Mohammed Patel a wheel brace for self-defence.
'I thought it was going to be a simple arrangement'
Jamal said he thought the discussion with Saqib to get the blackmail material would be short and that he "thought it was going to be a simple arrangement". Mr Thompson asked why it was necessary for Patel to have a weapon. Jamal replied: "It was just in case they had come with extra people - in case Saqib had come with his friends."Mr Thompson said: "The reason you had everyone there was that you knew he might not hand the phone over. The reason Mr Patel was there was to make up the numbers, wasn't it?"
Jamal said that wasn't true and they were all out socialising. Mr Thompson said the group had weapons in case the phone wasn't handed over but Jamal said that wasn't true and there were no balaclavas.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
2 | T20227026 T20227027 T20227046 T20227059 | ameer jamal ansreen bukhari mahek bukhari mohammed patel natasha akhtar raees jamal rekan karwan sanaf gulamustafa | |||
|
RJ: "I was shaken up after what had just happened. "
Prosecutor: "And what had just happened?"
It's so embarrassing! They think they can spin a pack of lies and fool an experienced barrister but he's wiping the floor with them.
Reminds me of Jodi Arias and how she thought she could lie her way out of jail.
Prosecutor: "And what had just happened?"
It's so embarrassing! They think they can spin a pack of lies and fool an experienced barrister but he's wiping the floor with them.
Reminds me of Jodi Arias and how she thought she could lie her way out of jail.
So I live fairly close to the A46 and drive on it most days.
Tonight by coincidence I did the route from Tesco Hamilton to the A46 northbound. What did occur to me is how many sets of traffic lights are on this journey. I reckon at least 6/7. So if the Skoda took off from Tesco to get away (after seeing two car loads of people waiting for them), then they’d have surely had to jump at least a few red lights (and thus the two following cars doing the same). Wouldn’t it have been pretty clear by then that the Skoda was not going to stop without force/something extreme happening?
Tonight by coincidence I did the route from Tesco Hamilton to the A46 northbound. What did occur to me is how many sets of traffic lights are on this journey. I reckon at least 6/7. So if the Skoda took off from Tesco to get away (after seeing two car loads of people waiting for them), then they’d have surely had to jump at least a few red lights (and thus the two following cars doing the same). Wouldn’t it have been pretty clear by then that the Skoda was not going to stop without force/something extreme happening?
It's scary. I think there was one mention of the Audi going through a red light.
Found it! I thought it was the mother!
Ansreen complained about Rekan jumping red light
Ansreen was asked about the point where the Audi TT drove through a red light and was caught on CCTV. She told the jury she complained to Rekan Karwan about that and he slowed down from that point onwards. She said: "He went through the red light and that really concerned me. I just said 'You've just gone through the red light' and he said 'There are no cameras here'."Mr Upward said the Audi data shows that Rekan Karwan did slow down after that point
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2015
- Messages
- 225
- Reaction score
- 1,242
The was a mention of red lights being jumped early on in the court case. They are all trying to dance around any intent of harm to Sabiq. The know that intent to harm that results in death is murder/manslaughter.
Everything to me states they well hell bent on harming Sabiq that night, The out and out denials of the strong evidence against them has got me intrigued TBH
I believe the Mum, Daughter and drivers will get done for murder. The other bit players im guessing will get manslaughter.
IMO
Yes, I totally agree with you - that sounds very plausible. So anything mentioning balaclavas, weapons, planning to "box him in" has to be flat out denied. I think Natasha may have got away with less if she hadn't stupidly blabbed everything on the phone. The daughter saying things like "we'll get him jumped" is definitely intent to cause GBH and though the mum is playing the innocent, she was there and knew the plan was to get back her photos (allegedly, more like prevent him from confessing to hubby) so would have been fully aware of what was going on. Also looks very bad for the drivers. MP with his balaclava and weapon also doesn't look in a good place. The other two may get by with a lesser conviction, unless they decide to testify. Given the state of the others' testimonies, they'd be better off not doing that! (all my opinion)
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
Raees Jamal back in the witness box
Prosecutor Collingwood Thompson KC is continuing his cross-examining of defendant Raees Jamal. He was driving the Seat Leon when the crash happened on Friday, February 11. Mr Thompson is discussing the incidents after the crash, when the defendants all returned to Leicester.Jury told why the hearing has started a bit late today
The judge, Mr Justice Saini, told the jury the case was late starting today because of a delay in getting one of the defendants to court. All eight are in custody in various prisons and have been for the past 10 months. They are brought to court from prison each morning.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
Choice of parking spot
When the cars returned to Leicester after the fatal crash they parked in Sutton Place in the Northfields area of Leicester. Jamal was asked by Mr Thompson why he chose the quiet cul-de-sac and Jamal admited he chose to park there because it was out of the way.We needed a breather'
First Mr Thompson asked Jamal how his co-defendant Rekan Karwan, who drove into Sutton Place in the Audi TT ahead of Jamal, knew about Sutton Place. Jamal said: "We used to go there for lockdown." He confirmed he wanted to be "out of the way" because of what had happened on the A46.Mr Thompson asked: "What was the purpose of getting out of the cars and walking around for about an hour?"
Jamal said: "We couldn't stay placed in the car, we needed a breather."
Mr Thompson asked: "Why didn't you want to be in the car?" He replied: "Because of what had happened."
He denied any effort was made to "clean up" the cars.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
'Why did Rekan Karwan return to the Audi TT?'
Mr Thompson asked why Rekan Karwan was received returning to Sutton Place. Jamal tells the jury Karwan needed to fetch his car keys from the parked cars. Mr Thompson asked if he was really going to wipe down the cars for fingerprints but Jamal denied that.Jamal was shown CCTV of him giving Mahek "a little nudge" while they walked along the street during the hour in Leicester after the crash. Then he is later shown "flicking at her hair".
Mr Thompson said: "You didn't care about what had happened - this was a job-done sort of mood, wasn't it?"
Jamal denied that was true.
Alerting co-defendants
Jamal admitted phoning his co-defendants about Natasha Akhtar's arrest. Mr Thompson asked: "Did you discuss a cover story?" Jamal said no but admitted he did make other efforts to avoid being caught. He has already told the jury he and some of his co-defendants went to exchange their phones for new ones and that Jamal and Rekan Karwan went to London afterwards.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
RusselSprout
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2021
- Messages
- 735
- Reaction score
- 4,809
'Assisting a murderer'
In a prison phone call that was recorded and obtained by the police, defendant Natasha Akhtar told a woman she was at risk of being charged with "assisting a murderer". Jamal agreed that was a reference to him.Next, Mr Thompson asked Jamal about a "story" Akhtar discussed on the call. Mr Thompson said: "The story they discussed was very similar to the one you've told us in your evidence, isn't it?" Jamal said it was.
However, Jamal again denied making up the story but admitted telling Mahek that she should take responsibility for everything.
Jamal said: "If she didn't call I wouldn't be in the situation. We discussed that she needed to take the rap for it."
He said that Mahek did not respond when he told her that.
'Some of those people that are sitting in the dock right now are there because of me'
Jamal told the jury he had a later conversation with Akhtar while she was driving him home to Loughborough when he told her he would be taking responsibility for what had happened on the A46. He said: "I told her I was going to take responsibility."He said again that he felt his driving was to blame for causing the crash, which he has described as an "accident". He said: "Some of those people that are sitting in the dock right now are there because of me and my driving."
Mr Thompson told Jamal that he had not taken responsibility for what happened because he was blaming a lot of it on the driver of the Skoda.
Live updates from day 19 of Mahek Bukhari TikTok murder trial
Eight people are on trial for killing Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin
Online statistics
- Members online
- 130
- Guests online
- 2,812
- Total visitors
- 2,942