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

When it was mentioned that there was already damage all around her car, my immediate thoughts were 'oh, here we go again with another pack of lies, she's playing along with the stories' - I wonder if her phone call will be brought up by any of the barristers? - With that 'damming evidence', I would have thought her best option would be to open up more to gain some credibility back with the judge/jury!?
Yeah when I heard that the car was already damaged my eyes rolled a bit. Apart from tag along Mo Patel all the other defendants are all going down the route of feigning ignorance.

They could have been honest instead and hoped for mercy from the court. They decided not and with the weight of CCTV and contradictions they have made a very bad decision.

IMO
 
Spot on Legal! From what I recall from her testimony Ansreen didn't seem to want to shoulder any of the blame!
Im guessing we will never know who out of the Mum and Daughter floated the idea of ambushing Sabiq that night.

Mabe it was Ansreen who went along to see her plan play out?

Not shouldering any blame has put Ansreen in a bad position considering she went along.

IMO
 

Natasha Akhtar back in the witness box​

Timothy Raggat KC is continuing to question his client, Natasha Akhtar, who was the owner of the Seat Leon that allegedly rammed the Skoda off the road, causing the fatal crash, and was in the back seat of the car at the time of the collision.

Akhtar's movements​

Akhtar said she went to Raees Jamal's house in Loughborough at about 3pm on Thursday, February 10, and he eventually showed up two hours later. She said she was "quite angry" about having to wait.
She said: "We went to pick up Sanaf. Then we've gone to pick up Ammeer on Catherine Street. After that we've gone to Raees's relative's house - I think it was on Catherine Street."
She said Raees went inside for about 10 to 15 minutes and she stayed in car. Ammeer and Sanaf went to a shop nearby.
After that they all went to Tubo - a shisha lounge on Belgrave Circle. She said she and Raees had been there before together. She said Raees was driving "normally".

Plan to leave Leicester that night​

She was asked where they all planned to go after Tubo and she said there was talk of going out of Leicester somewhere but there was no clear plan about where they would go. She said: "We were going to go out of town later on."
She said they all played Monopoly in Tubo and said Rekan Karwan showed up briefly - for about 20 minutes - and spoke to Raees but she did not know what they spoke about.
She said they left Tubo at about midnight. She said she had not been told where they were going but Raees told her they were "maybe" going to Nottinghamshire.
She said Raees told her "a friend" would be coming along but didn't say who it was.
 

'No balaclavas'​

She said that after Tubo they went to Rekan Karwan's house, arriving at about 1am. Raees got out of the car and spoke to Rekan, she said.
She was asked why they went to Karwan's and she said that was normal on a night out. She said: "There was no reason, we always go."
Next, Raees returned to the car and Ammeer told him he needed to go home. She said Ammeer said he needed to go home to use the toilet. She stayed in the car with Raees and Sanaf while Ammeer went inside to use the toilet.
Mr Raggat asked: "Did you see any of the three men in your car with any balaclava or any covering of that nature that night?"
She said: "No, it did not." She was asked about Covid masks and said she did not recall seeing any.

'No idea who was in Audi TT'​

After going to Ammeer's house they returned to Rekan Karwan's in Tomlin Road. She said the Audi TT was parked there but she didn't know who was inside. She said Raees got out of the car and walked towards the Audi TT, which was parked "a few cars behind" in Tomlin Road.
She said when Raees returned to the Seat Leon "he didn't mention nothing" about what the conversation had been about. She said the only other person she had seen at that point was Rekan Karwan, who was also standing near the Audi TT.
Mahek Bukhari and her mother Ansreen were in the Audi TT but Natasha claims she did not know that.

Raees Jamal drove them to Tesco​

She said Raees Jamal drove to Tesco after speaking outside the Audi. Akhtar said: "After he came back we drove off and we ended up in Tesco's car park."
She said she had never been to that Tesco before. In the car park Akhtar moved from the front seat to the rear seat while they were in the car park.
She said the Audi TT arrived shortly after they got to Tesco. She said: "It had parked next to me, beside me."
She said she could not see into the Audi TT. She said: "When it parked beside me, that's when me and Sanaf swapped places. Sanaf was complaining about not having enough leg space so I told him to get into the front."

'No idea why they were at Tesco'​

During the time in Tesco she saw Mohammed Patel and Rekan Karwan walking away from the Audi. She said they were not carrying anything or wearing anything unusual.
She was asked if she knew why they were at Tesco. She said; "I didn't know why. Raees had said 'two minutes and we go'." She said she did not ask him any more about it.
Mr Raggat said: "The suggestion in this case is that there was a plan to meet this man, Saqib. Did anyone ever discuss it with you?" She said no.

'No idea they were leaving to follow Skoda'​

Akhtar said that she was not aware of the Skoda arriving or that they were following it when they left Tesco. CCTV showed the Skoda driving into the Tesco car park, pausing for a few seconds and then driving off. The prosecution said the two occupants, who later died, had probably seen signs of an "ambush".
When they drove off after the Skoda, Akhtar said she thought they were going "out of town".

Raees sped up on the A46​

Akhtar said she thought they were driving up the A46 to go to Nottingham. She said Raees had been driving up the A46 when his speed increased. She said that did not concern her "because that's how he normally drives".
But later she told him to slow down. She said: "That was because the Skoda wasn't giving us space to go past."
She said she had first noticed the Skoda when it "tried hitting into the back of the Skoda".
 

Skoda 'driving in and out of lanes'​

She described the Skoda moving between lanes although, from the back of the Seat, she could only see "a little bit" of what was going on. She said: "I'd seen that the Skoda had tried to swerve into the Audi but the Audi had swerved and avoided contact.
"The boys in my car were telling Raees to chill out."

Seat attempt to overtake Skoda​

She said after the incident between the Audi and the Skoda there was an attempt by Raees, behind the wheel of the Seat Leon, to overtake the Skoda but it was trying to stop them getting past. She told Raees to slow down at that point.
She said: "Because my car was so close to the Skoda I told him not to damage my car. Then he did drop his speed."
She was told about the phone conversation between the two cars - she said she didn't notice it. She said the car was "noisy" when it was being driven fast.
She said she didn't notice any kind of impact at any point.

No sign of crash​

Summing up the interactions before the fatal crash, she said: "My car had tried to overtake the Skoda, the Skoda was not letting us get past. He kept swerving in and out of lanes."
She said that after that they did manage to get past the Skoda but she didn't know how that happened or see it happening.
Mr Raggat said: "Did you know what, if anything, had happened to it?" She said no.
He asked: "Did you ever say or do anything to encourage Raees to drive dangerously or ram a vehicle?" She said no.
He asked: "What did you think all this swerving was about?" She said: "I didn't know why [the Skoda] was swerving."
Mr Raggat asked: "Did you think anything sinister was happening?" She said she didn't.

Raees Jamal 'panicky' after pulling off the A46​

She was asked why, after the pulled off the A46, she thought they were heading back to Leicester. She said she didn't know why and she didn't ask.
The pulled off the road near Willoughby-on-the-Wolds and stopped in the car park of Nottingham Raceway Karting.
She said Raees "seemed panicky" and asked her to drive. She took over the driving and didn't ask why.
She said she climbed into the driver's seat without leaving the car, Raees got into the front passenger seat and Gulammustafa got into the back seat with Ammeer Jamal.
She said Raees told her to drive back towards Leicester.

Passing the flaming vehicle​

She was asked about the trip back and the car wreck. She said: "I've seen a car in flames. It was on the central reservation."
She said she did not recognise the vehicle. She said: "The car looked empty, like there was no one in there."
Mr Raggat said: "We know it was the Skoda. At that time did you realise that?" She said no.
When they saw the wreck she asked the others "what the ****'s happened?" and that the others were also reacting to the burning car. She said: "Everyone was going mad."
She added: "As we went past I've seen blue lights - an emergency vehicle."
 

Akhtar 'had no idea what had happened until she was arrested'​

The jury has heard that both the Audi TT and the Seat Leon returned to Leicester and parked up in Sutton Place, a cul-de-sac in the Northfields area of the city.
Akhtar told her Raees had told her to follow the Audi TT and she ended up in Sutton Place. She said she did not know the area herself.
Mr Raggat asked: "Obviously people in your car were upset about something. Did you know at that stage what they were upset about?" She said no.
She said she didn't know what was going on at that point. Mr Raggat said: "Did there come a point where you did learn something about what had actually happened?" She said: "After being arrested."
She said she only saw Mahek and Ansreen Bukhari after they got out of the cars in Sutton Place.
 

'No conversations' on walk around Leicester​

During the hour the defendants spent in Leicester after the fatal crash she did not speak to any of her co-accused. She said: "I didn't want to be sociable at that point. I'd just seen a car on fire, which had traumatised me because I'd never seen anything like that before."
After the walk she dropped Sanaf Gulammustafa off at his home and then drove Raees back to Loughborough and dropped him off.
She said they did not tell her anything about what had happened and she did not ask them any questions.
The jury has been sent out for a 10-minute break.
 
This is maddening as she is sounding the worse out of the lot.

She thinks she will only receive Guilty of assisting an offender but I hope he gets manslaughter at a minimum.

I need a coffee
My brain makes the automatic assumption that if you are lying, you are guilty, i think the only one we got a shred of truth from was Mohammed Patel.
 
Is Nat the last to go on the stand Ive kind of lost track.

For this part of the proceedings, I would like to think that the prosecution put her on the stand last because they knew she would be the most stubborn with the truth. Good move if so.

Nats denials have taken their defence to a whole new level of absurdity and god only knows what she (and the others) will look like once the prosecution is finished with her.

IMO
 
I hope the prosecution goes to town on Natasha and her recorded prison conversation. All these lies are so implausible. Who goes out with their friends and doesn't ask questions about where they're going, who the other people are, etc etc
 
She is the last of the eight accused I believe (a DC has already been on the stand too), do they typically call any others, such as expert witnesses?
Thanks

There were some experts who testified early on but im not sure if that was all of them.

Mabe the judge or jury will want clarifications on things, so we will hear from some defendants again.

Due to nearly all the defendants not implicating each other, that has saved a lot of time and I think this
trail could wrap next week.
 
I've just had a read through the first LM article about the case, worth a quick scan for a recap! :)

On day one (18th Oct) some key noteworthy items:

- Trial expected to last eight weeks (So ~2 weeks left)
- There was around a weeks delay after day one
- There are 17 barristers involved, representing the 8 defendants!!
- All 8 defendants are charged with murder, which they all deny
- There were 8 members of the press on day one
 
I've just had a read through the first LM article about the case, worth a quick scan for a recap! :)

On day one (18th Oct) some key noteworthy items:

- Trial expected to last eight weeks (So ~2 weeks left)
- There was around a weeks delay after day one
- There are 17 barristers involved, representing the 8 defendants!!
- All 8 defendants are charged with murder, which they all deny
- There were 8 members of the press on day one

Re-reading that I was thinking about what MP claimed mahek said to saqib on the phone. "Watch what I do to you". To me, it seems a strange grammatical construction so I googled it and there seem to be a few rap songs with "watch what I do" as the title. Which seems to tie in with what someone claimed was her wannabe gangster tiktok videos. Disclaimer: totally not my generation in terms of language, music and social media!
 
  • Like
Reactions: nao
Re-reading that I was thinking about what MP claimed mahek said to saqib on the phone. "Watch what I do to you". To me, it seems a strange grammatical construction so I googled it and there seem to be a few rap songs with "watch what I do" as the title. Which seems to tie in with what someone claimed was her wannabe gangster tiktok videos. Disclaimer: totally not my generation in terms of language, music and social media!
I took that as being a veiled threat.

When your enemy says "Watch what I do to you" when you are being chased with two car loads of people
featuring balaclavas, it sais a lot.

I think the jury will beleive MP. He was honest on a lot of other things so why not that.

IMO
 
I took that as being a veiled threat.

When your enemy says "Watch what I do to you" when you are being chased with two car loads of people
featuring balaclavas, it sais a lot.

I think the jury will beleive MP. He was honest on a lot of other things so why not that.

IMO

Yes, I totally agree it's a threat. It was just the phraseology that was strange to me, but perhaps that's my age!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
44
Guests online
4,012
Total visitors
4,056

Forum statistics

Threads
592,490
Messages
17,969,787
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top