GUILTY UK - Sara Sharif, 10, found murdered in house, Surrey, Aug 2023 *POIs ARREST* #4

[Kasmeer]

From what we have been privy to from articles in msm . I can't see how the uncle can be charged with any more than fleeing the scene of a crime . How do you get an airtight conviction on the assumption he knew .

Urfan and bienash are definitely going down for a long time but for a murder charge to stick .There has to be intent . Which means the jury must find that urfan intended to kill Sara instead of just putting her in grave danger of dying .

I think this is why the judge has brought in the idea of manslaughter so soon as I feel he knows there is more chance of appeal on a murder charge .

Snipped for focus and bolded for the point I'm replying to - the intent only needs to be to cause very serious harm, not to kill, and I find it hard to think he did not intend serious harm! I've seen this point raised in various cases recently, but I looked up an official source to confirm:

Homicide: Murder, manslaughter, infanticide and causing or allowing the death or serious injury of a child or vulnerable adult | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

Murder​

Subject to three exceptions (which constitute partial defences to murder, and result in a conviction for manslaughter) the crime of murder is committed, where a person:

• of sound mind and discretion (sane)
• unlawfully kills (not self-defence or other justified killing)
• any reasonable creature (a human being)
• in being (born alive and breathing through its own lungs)
• under the King's Peace (not in wartime)
• with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (in contrast to the offence of attempted murder, where only intent to kill will suffice)

Intent is an ordinary English word. It should not normally be elaborated on or paraphrased. It is different from motive and the prosecution does not have to prove motive, or that grievous bodily harm or death were the outcome wished for. For further consideration where intent might be an issue, see the Judicial College's Crown Court Compendium, Part 1, at 8-1.

The suspect's act must be a substantial cause of the death, not necessarily the sole or principal cause.


---

(Bolding by me) I'd say that US's admissions during cross-examination basically admitted murder under that description, since there must have been intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

I think the jury will have a harder time with the other two; or certainly BB, who seems to my mind to have clearly abused Sara... but how much? Was US trying to take blame off her with his admissions, or was she "only" abusing Sara to a level that might not be considered so severe as to constitute murder? Perhaps this is why manslaughter was added, CPS defintion of that from the link above:

Manslaughter​

Manslaughter is primarily committed in one of three ways:

1. Killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, namely loss of control, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact.
2. Conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and did kill ("gross negligence manslaughter"); and
3. Conduct taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm that resulted in death ("unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter").

---

I'm guessing the bolded are most applicable here, if the jury should feel that BB is not proved to have committed or encouraged the worst of the injuries.

Meanwhile FM... I think reasonable doubt may have to apply to him, unless the jury heard evidence that I have not - it's entirely possible that a much younger brother would stay out of the way, not involving himself in "parenting" (really abuse), and just close his eyes and ears until things went too far. Can't imagine he never saw any signs, so "allowing", yep, but participating or encouraging is not something I could be at all sure of given the evidence; he's only been mentioned regarding things entirely compatible with just living in the house (DNA on a belt) and getting roped into cleaning up afterwards (the McDonalds uniform).

And yes, in all honesty I hope he wasn't involved in the abuse, both for Sara's sake (one fewer person attacking her) and for my faith in humanity; I can take the idea of two evil people and one cowardly bystander better than three evil people...

(All the above just my opinion; with no legal knowledge other than following a good few trials over the years)

 

[su5ie]

Snipped for focus and bolded for the point I'm replying to - the intent only needs to be to cause very serious harm, not to kill, and I find it hard to think he did not intend serious harm! I've seen this point raised in various cases recently, but I looked up an official source to confirm:

Homicide: Murder, manslaughter, infanticide and causing or allowing the death or serious injury of a child or vulnerable adult | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

Murder​

Subject to three exceptions (which constitute partial defences to murder, and result in a conviction for manslaughter) the crime of murder is committed, where a person:

• of sound mind and discretion (sane)
• unlawfully kills (not self-defence or other justified killing)
• any reasonable creature (a human being)
• in being (born alive and breathing through its own lungs)
• under the King's Peace (not in wartime)
• with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (in contrast to the offence of attempted murder, where only intent to kill will suffice)

Intent is an ordinary English word. It should not normally be elaborated on or paraphrased. It is different from motive and the prosecution does not have to prove motive, or that grievous bodily harm or death were the outcome wished for. For further consideration where intent might be an issue, see the Judicial College's Crown Court Compendium, Part 1, at 8-1.

The suspect's act must be a substantial cause of the death, not necessarily the sole or principal cause.


---

(Bolding by me) I'd say that US's admissions during cross-examination basically admitted murder under that description, since there must have been intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

I think the jury will have a harder time with the other two; or certainly BB, who seems to my mind to have clearly abused Sara... but how much? Was US trying to take blame off her with his admissions, or was she "only" abusing Sara to a level that might not be considered so severe as to constitute murder? Perhaps this is why manslaughter was added, CPS defintion of that from the link above:

Manslaughter​

Manslaughter is primarily committed in one of three ways:

1. Killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, namely loss of control, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact.
2. Conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and did kill ("gross negligence manslaughter"); and
3. Conduct taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm that resulted in death ("unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter").

---

I'm guessing the bolded are most applicable here, if the jury should feel that BB is not proved to have committed or encouraged the worst of the injuries.

Meanwhile FM... I think reasonable doubt may have to apply to him, unless the jury heard evidence that I have not - it's entirely possible that a much younger brother would stay out of the way, not involving himself in "parenting" (really abuse), and just close his eyes and ears until things went too far. Can't imagine he never saw any signs, so "allowing", yep, but participating or encouraging is not something I could be at all sure of given the evidence; he's only been mentioned regarding things entirely compatible with just living in the house (DNA on a belt) and getting roped into cleaning up afterwards (the McDonalds uniform).

And yes, in all honesty I hope he wasn't involved in the abuse, both for Sara's sake (one fewer person attacking her) and for my faith in humanity; I can take the idea of two evil people and one cowardly bystander better than three evil people...

(All the above just my opinion; with no legal knowledge other than following a good few trials over the years)

Thank you so much for that clarity. Really great explanation and this gives me a better understanding of how the decision is made.

 

[Dotta]

Very detailed report
(as always)
From Guildford Dragon:

Wednesday November 20

The Judge explained that the Prosecution did not contend that the defendants intended to kill Sara but that they had caused or significantly contributed to her death and that they intended to cause her really serious harm,
which is sufficient for murder.

Guildford Dragon NEWS

Guildford News

guildford-dragon.com

The court resumes at 10 am on November 21
for closing speeches.

 

[Nikynoo]

I would have thought that - if convicted of murder - then it is obvious that the accused caused the death of the child, so I did not expect the other charge to stand.

However you are correct - they can be found guilty of both charges.

Selection of charges​

Causing or allowing the death of a child or vulnerable adult should not be charged instead of murder or manslaughter, where there is sufficient evidence to prosecute murder or manslaughter. As above, the causing or allowing offence may be charged in addition to murder or manslaughter.

Homicide: Murder, manslaughter, infanticide and causing or allowing the death or serious injury of a child or vulnerable adult | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

from the Guildford Dragon Guildford Dragon NEWS

'...if they found a defendant guilty of murder, they would not need to consider or return any verdict on manslaughter or on causing or allowing the death of a child.

If they found a defendant guilty of manslaughter, the jury would not need to consider the count of causing or allowing the death of a child.

If, however, they did not find a defendant guilty of murder or manslaughter, they should consider the alternative offence of causing or allowing the death of a child.

So, it does look like the causing the death of a child is an alternative offence. I believe that the max sentence if a D is found guilty is 25 years?

 

[Moll]

Very detailed report
(as always)
From Guildford Dragon:

Wednesday November 20

The Judge explained that the Prosecution did not contend that the defendants intended to kill Sara but that they had caused or significantly contributed to her death and that they intended to cause her really serious harm,
which is sufficient for murder.

Guildford Dragon NEWS

Guildford News

guildford-dragon.com

The court resumes at 10 am on November 21
for closing speeches.

Yes, this makes the judge's guidelines much clearer.
Did you notice that there's a link in a sidebar to the right of the page to a reader's letter thanking the Dragon for its coverage of this case? The editor replies thanking Surrey Police for their help in providing daily court reports.

 

[Deleted member 306904]

Police totally ignored pattern of violence and denial and reversal of accusations. Makes my blood boil .

If they get sentenced for manslaughter I will loose all hope in the justice system particularly when children are murdered . Because if he intentionally hit Sara with weapons that can cause death surely his intention was to inflict the ultimate damage

I lost all hope years ago. I well remember the Maria Colwell case and the "Never Again" slogan that was bandid about.

 

[VioletLilac]

These cases have been going on forever sadly. The first one I remember was Kimberly Carlisle. There's a list of the most high profile ones here. It only goes up to 2002 though as it's an old article

Redirect Notice

 

[Deleted member 306904]

These cases have been going on forever sadly. The first one I remember was Kimberly Carlisle. There's a list of the most high profile ones here. It only goes up to 2002 though

Redirect Notice

Poor Maria was 1973 and it sticks in my mind because my son was born that year.

 

[seasideForest]

How did she forget what happened on the previous evening? The tone and content of that second message seems completely out of place if what she wrote in the first message was accurate. JMO

I imagine she may have conveniently 'forgot' it i.e. put it out of her mind in an attempt to deflect her sister's question. A type of denial basically. MOO

 

[FlamingLily]

These cases have been going on forever sadly. The first one I remember was Kimberly Carlisle. There's a list of the most high profile ones here. It only goes up to 2002 though as it's an old article

Redirect Notice

This is eye-searingly sad to read. I realise these are only a few of hundreds of annual cases in the region with thousands of contributing factors. But striking that in this particular list most are girls killed by stepfathers. You'd want constant unnanounced checks in homes with this care combo after these findings. JMO

 

[su5ie]

This is eye-searingly sad to read. I realise these are only a few of hundreds of annual cases in the region with thousands of contributing factors. But striking that in this particular list most are girls killed by stepfathers. You'd want constant unnanounced checks in homes with this care combo after these findings. JMO

This is why single /seperated parents need to be very careful whom they allow around their children .

Most parents whom find they are in this situation will put kids first and not their own lovelife and selfish wants . Their children should be enough company and fulfillment.

Life is not all about having a partner.
But very often the natural parent in these cases is so full of dysfunction themselves that they do not stop the relationship if a red flag appears and are willing accomplices even if they didn't strike the blows or inflict the abuse themselves. And should be punished equally

The step fathers in the cases we are talking about were given free reign . The mothers allowed it .

If jury's are a selection of our peers . Person's like ourselves I have a good feeling they are on the same page as we are Anguished, disgusted ,heartbroken and angry and will want justice for Sara . Im finding comfort in that .

 

[Alyce]

No real update - just showing that the Prosecution is doing their closing this morning


www.thelawpages.com

​

​

​

 

[FlamingLily]

Sara Sharif begged her parents before being 'battered to death'

10-year-old schoolgirl Sara Sharif penned heartbreaking letters in which she begged for forgiveness from her father, shortly before he beat her to death, a court has heard.

www.dailymail.co.uk

'I am sorry for my answering back and what I said.

'I am sorry that I just sat.. not learning.

'Please forgive me, I am so, so sorry.'

Like that poor, poor girl had the capacity to sit and learn after regular beatings and constant slaps about the head. I can’t
These letters are very telling in how petty the parents were for brutal punishments. Sitting not learning shouldn't reap a humiliating beating. It should alert parents to the appropriate support needed for trauma, ADD or ASD etc. Also, why were they in Sara’s possession - alongside her notebook - if they were given as peace offerings. Perhaps rejected by U and B as if the desperate pleas meant nothing to them. JMO

 

[UK Girl]

This is why single /seperated parents need to be very careful whom they allow around their children .

Most parents whom find they are in this situation will put kids first and not their own lovelife and selfish wants . Their children should be enough company and fulfillment.

Life is not all about having a partner.
But very often the natural parent in these cases is so full of dysfunction themselves that they do not stop the relationship if a red flag appears and are willing accomplices even if they didn't strike the blows or inflict the abuse themselves. And should be punished equally

The step fathers in the cases we are talking about were given free reign . The mothers allowed it .

If jury's are a selection of our peers . Person's like ourselves I have a good feeling they are on the same page as we are Anguished, disgusted ,heartbroken and angry and will want justice for Sara . Im finding comfort in that .

Some mothers can be way worse than step mothers tbh

 

[FlamingLily]

This is why single /seperated parents need to be very careful whom they allow around their children .

Most parents whom find they are in this situation will put kids first and not their own lovelife and selfish wants . Their children should be enough company and fulfillment.

Life is not all about having a partner.
But very often the natural parent in these cases is so full of dysfunction themselves that they do not stop the relationship if a red flag appears and are willing accomplices even if they didn't strike the blows or inflict the abuse themselves. And should be punished equally

The step fathers in the cases we are talking about were given free reign . The mothers allowed it .

If jury's are a selection of our peers . Person's like ourselves I have a good feeling they are on the same page as we are Anguished, disgusted ,heartbroken and angry and will want justice for Sara . Im finding comfort in that .

Does anyone think that *maybe* the loud banging and rattling was Sara’s brother or step-siblings locked away from her to not interfere with the punishments? A random thought but could be of significance given the text he sent to friend about her dying. He certainly was reaching riskily beyond the house of horrors (where cards and phones would have been tightly monitored) through this reaction. It's impossible to think that absolutely NOBODY stood up for this little girl. JMO

 

[FlamingLily]

Does anyone think that *maybe* the loud banging and rattling was Sara’s brother or step-siblings locked away from her to not interfere with the punishments? A random thought but could be of significance given the text he sent to friend about her dying. He certainly was reaching riskily beyond the house of horrors (where cards and phones would have been tightly monitored) through this reaction. It's impossible to think that absolutely NOBODY stood up for this little girl. JMO

Also, who needs to be locked behind chained doors when they're bound, hands and feet, with tape?

 

[irnbru]

I deliver training in my job that relates to some of the issues we have talked about here.

Around 50-60 children are killed by caregivers in the UK each year, this is a number which doesn't tend to change much.

Of genetic parents, fathers are far more likely than mothers to murder their children and to do so via extreme violence.

Although there has been some revision of the figures relating to the risks the presence of a step parent represents in the past few years (mostly looking again at who is deemed a step parent and considering the extent to which the age of the victim/ perpetrator impacts on the risks), that children are up to 100 times more likely to be killed or very seriously injured when living with a step parent or equivalent hasn't changed.

And when the serious case review is written we all know what it will say, what they always say, and we will all talk about the lessons to be learned and we will all go to bed that night knowing that there are more Saras (and Starrs, and Arthurs, and Victorias and Daniels and Peters and Marias and Khyras and Laurens and Logans and on and on and on) unprotected and suffering. And I will add this latest scr to the library of those I draw on to deliver the training I do at work and I will talk again about how we should not even know Sara's name, we should not know any of these children's names because they should be alive and well and happy and not famous due to their awful death.

I'm sorry to get so upset. It just hits me every time at this stage in one of these cases. The police and cps and court have done what they can to get justice, and there are thousands of practitioners out there who are doing what they can to save kids, but it keeps happening and it is just unbearable to know. It's happening right now. In a few months we will be talking about another poor child as we talk about Sara. It is just unbearable.

 

[bobbymkii]

No real update - just showing that the Prosecution is doing their closing this morning


www.thelawpages.com

View attachment 546372​

​

​

Latest:

Sara Sharif's father 'trying to get away with murder', court hears

Urfan Sharif admitted violence towards his daughter but still denies murder

www.standard.co.uk

 

[Sooty]

`Formidable case´ made against Sara Sharif murder accused

Urfan Sharif, 42, Beinash Batool, 30, and Faisal Malik, 29, are on trial at the Old Bailey over the 10-year-old´s death at the family home in Surrey.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Mr Emlyn Jones told jurors: “The point has been made not every injury was in of itself a fatal injury, that is conveniently to ignore the cumulative effect.

“You are not required to find a specific fatal injury, it is simply not possible. Sara was killed by the combined effect of what she suffered over time

 

[Dotta]

Latest:

Sara Sharif's father 'trying to get away with murder', court hears

Urfan Sharif admitted violence towards his daughter but still denies murder

www.standard.co.uk

From the link above:

Prosecutor
William Emlyn Jones KC:

"For the last eight months of her life,
when the level of violence grew to the point where it ultimately cost her her life,
there were three adults living in the house with her.
None of them ever reported Sara’s abuse, suffering, or injuries
to any outside agency
which could have intervened."

How true!