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

  • #541
Who in here has the appropriate magic buttons to change the word "Mistrial" to "Retrial" ?

Whoever that is could they do that please?
I've requested to mods to change
 
  • #542

Jury selected​

The jury for the trial has been selected.

The case is due to a retrial​

Members of the jury have been told the case is a retrial.

'Do Not Speculate'​

The judge Timothy Spencer KC told members of the jury this morning: "This case is a retrial. The trial was stopped due to nothing to do with the prosecution, defence or defendants. That trial was stopped due to unforseen events and nothing to do with the parties."
The judge added: "Do not speculate any further. The reason why it was stopped is nothing to do with the prosecution, defence or any of the defendants."

Court latest​

The case will resume on Monday.
 
  • #543
Some articles from the start of the case today


Is it me or has the emphasis shifted a little from MB to RJ with regards to setting things up?

For reference to those curious, here’s the first day on the trial previously.


And a BBC article which includes a court room sketch, not seen in the previous trial:

_129487821_dfa8cb5a-0723-48f1-b4f8-0b1c58fbe238.jpg.webp

HELEN TIPPER (From front left) Ansreen Bukhari, Mahek Bukari, Rekan Karwan, Raees Jamal, (from top left) Ameer Jamal, Sanaf Gulammustafa, Natasha Akhtar and Mohammed Patel

 
  • #544
Interesting observation! I just went a had a quick look and it does seem that Mahek was emphasised more in the 1st trial. The prosecutor seemed to emphasise joint enterprise this time and gave the option of manslaughter. It seems so strange to me having to do everything again from the beginning. One other thing that struck me was the sheer cost of this trial. Each of the defendants has 2 barristers. And this is the 2nd attempt. I really hope they don't screw it up this time!
 
  • #545
  • #546

So prosecution has ripped Mahek's police statement to shreds today. It's clearly full of lies. With Patel's evidence of the balaclavas, the weapons in the car, turning their phones off and then lying to the police, I can't see any of them getting away with this.

Really good that Saqib called 999 - not sure whether this would be a murder trial if he hadn't.
 
  • #547
So prosecution has ripped Mahek's police statement to shreds today. It's clearly full of lies. With Patel's evidence of the balaclavas, the weapons in the car, turning their phones off and then lying to the police, I can't see any of them getting away with this.

Really good that Saqib called 999 - not sure whether this would be a murder trial if he hadn't.
I think they would have, but not as quickly.
They certainly wouldn't have made 3 arrests within hours of the incident, but they would have eventually seen CCTV of the chase with the Seat and the Audi following closely at high speed and the incident in the Tesco car park.
 
  • #548
Interesting observation! I just went a had a quick look and it does seem that Mahek was emphasised more in the 1st trial. The prosecutor seemed to emphasise joint enterprise this time and gave the option of manslaughter. It seems so strange to me having to do everything again from the beginning. One other thing that struck me was the sheer cost of this trial. Each of the defendants has 2 barristers. And this is the 2nd attempt. I really hope they don't screw it up this time!
especially as the first trial took up 9 weeks of court time and was getting very close to the end before it suddenly collapsed!
 
  • #549
 
  • #550
I can only imagine the frustration Sadiq and Hashim's family and friends must have felt with the original mistrial.

From my recollection of the initial trial compared to this one so far: the relationship between Sadiq and Ansreen and the importance of the mobile data have been established in a much clearer way at this early stage.

I said it before and I still believe that Patels testimony will be significant if there are any guilty verdicts.

Of course it's still very early days again so I will watch and see
 
  • #551
I can only imagine the frustration Sadiq and Hashim's family and friends must have felt with the original mistrial.

From my recollection of the initial trial compared to this one so far: the relationship between Sadiq and Ansreen and the importance of the mobile data have been established in a much clearer way at this early stage.

I said it before and I still believe that Patels testimony will be significant if there are any guilty verdicts.

Of course it's still very early days again so I will watch and see
It's Saqib, not Sadiq.
As for Patel I'm actually wondering if he might choose not to testify. If he does give evidence he will be getting ferocious cross examination not just from the prosecution, but also from most of the defendant's barristers as he has provided significant evidence against their clients in his police interviews and their cases all depend heavily on undermining and discrediting his story.
 
  • #552

A jury in the trial of TikTok star Mahek Bukhari and seven other people has been told that all eight defendants were part of a plot to kill or seriously harm two young men who died in a crash on the A46.

The jury members have been told by the prosecution that the crash was caused by a car ramming the Skoda containing Saqib and Hashim as they fled a meeting with the eight defendants which had been held a few minutes earlier at Tesco in Hamilton, Leicester.
 
  • #553
11:07 'Go on, ram him'
Patel said he was holding his phone towards Rekan, who was driving the Audi, so that Rekan could talk to Raees Jamal. He said Rekan told Raees: "Go on, ram him".
Patel said: "Rekan was trying to stop this guy. Rekan said, '**** it, ram him'."

The tape was paused and the judge told the jury they could not take Patel's comments in interview as evidence against his co-accused. The judge said: "What Mohammed Patel says is only evidence about Mohammed Patel."

This drove me mad during the first trial, and it's driving me mad again now in the retrial. How on earth can the jury be expected to follow this instruction from the judge?!
 
  • #554
  • #555
So is anyone following this trial this week or <modsnip - off topic>?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #556
So is anyone following this trial this week or <modsnip - off topic>?!
Yep, me. It's a bit tedious going through everything again and I worry that they will be better prepared when cross examined this time. But the lies, particularly by Mahek are so obvious. I really want her to be found guilty. Well, they all played a part but some definitely more than others. JMO.
 
  • #557
  • #558
So is anyone following this trial this week or <modsnip - off topic>?!
Im not following it too closely now as its seems all the defendants are going down the ignorance route again.
They all know that an intent to harm that ends in death is deemed as manslaughter or murder.
They are all going to take their chances with the jury. IMO its going to take a pretty blind jury to see no
intent to harm. A sure a few were there that night who were naïve to the gravity of the situation.

Im hoping the main players get what they deserve. Two young men in the prime of their lives died and the main players have got to own it.

JMO
 
  • #559
Im not following it too closely now as its seems all the defendants are going down the ignorance route again.
They all know that an intent to harm that ends in death is deemed as manslaughter or murder.
They are all going to take their chances with the jury. IMO its going to take a pretty blind jury to see no
intent to harm. A sure a few were there that night who were naïve to the gravity of the situation.

Im hoping the main players get what they deserve. Two young men in the prime of their lives died and the main players have got to own it.

JMO
I'll probably get right back into it when the defendants take the stand again. That could well go very differently to how it went last time. Also I'll be paying attention when the crash scene investigator gives evidence again. His evidence in the first trial was DAMNING!
I wonder if the prosecution will be able to get Mahek to repeat the immortal line "yes, I told a lot of lies" on the stand? They'll certainly be trying.
In general I wonder if having a retrial benefits the defendants more or the prosecution when it comes to cross examination?
 
  • #560
_129487821_dfa8cb5a-0723-48f1-b4f8-0b1c58fbe238.jpg.webp

HELEN TIPPER (From front left) Ansreen Bukhari, Mahek Bukari, Rekan Karwan, Raees Jamal, (from top left) Ameer Jamal, Sanaf Gulammustafa, Natasha Akhtar and Mohammed Patel

So if I may, for those who are looking to catch up, use this image for a quick summary of the trial so far of each defendant. Everything is very much J.M.O.
Ansreen:
Has an affair with a man a quarter of a century younger than her. After 3 years she finally regrets it and the decisions only get worse from there.
Mahek:
World's most mediocre TikTok influencer and worst liar. But on the plus side her heart is pure.
Rekan:
Man likes to drive other people's cars fast and dangerously. Doesn't like having a license or insurance or boring things like that.
Raeess:
He just wanted to "talk" to them, OK?
Mohammed:
Man tried to snitch his way out of cuffs. It wasn't effective. Neither was the tyre iron stuffed into his pants.
Natasha:
Most loyal girlfriend ever. Who else would stick by her man even after they implicated them in a murder prosecution by using her car to [allegedly] ram two strangers into the central reservation at high speed?
Sanaf:
Man just wanted to smoke some shisha, play some monopoly, then go home to bed.
Ameer:
He told the police nothing, but he told his boss everything!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
1,105
Total visitors
1,171

Forum statistics

Threads
632,335
Messages
18,624,886
Members
243,095
Latest member
Lillyflowerxx
Back
Top