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

If I remember my criminal law rightly, intoxication isn't a defence to murder if the intent can be proven. Voluntary intoxication definitely meets the recklessness criteria for manslaughter as the defendent was reckless for getting intoxicated.
 

Timing of phone battery dying was 'coincidence'​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has said it was a coincidence that his phone battery died just before he and seven others are then alleged to have put their plan against Saqib Hussain into action. Within minutes the group were in the car park at the Hamilton brach of Tesoo where they met up with the victim.
Balraj Bhatia KC said: "Is it coincidence that your phone battery died just before the ambush of eight of you began at Tesco?"
"Yes" replied Gulammustafa.

Sat listening to music in car​

Sanaf Gulammustafa said he never intended to go out after leaving Tubo's that evening. He was a passenger in the Seat when it arrived at Rekan Karwan's house. Rather than ask to be taken home by Raees Jamal in the Seat Leon, Gulammustafa said he sat listening to music in the car.
The reason for this was because co-accused Ameer Jamal had gone into the house to go toilet.
"I didn't know how long he was going to be," he told the court.
 

In 'no rush to get home'​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has said that despite earlier claiming to want to go home after leaving Tubo in Belgrave, he did not insist to the Seat driver, Raees Jamal, to take him home.
"I was in no rush to get home," he told the court. It was at this point that the Seat then travelled in the direction of the Hamilton branch of Tesco where the alleged ambush on Saqib Hussain began.

Night out with Gulammustafa 'does not sound interesting'​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has acknowledged that he was in the Seat at the Tesco car park shortly after 1am on February 11 this year. However, he said he was sitting in silence and not speaking to any of the other people in the Seat or the Audi TT which was driven by Mahek Bukhari.
Balraj Bhatia KC said: "I hope you don't mind me saying this, but a night out with you doesn't sound very interesting. So far you have gone out and not said a word to anyone.'
Gulammustafa said the reason for this was simple.
"I was stressed," he told the court.

No weapons in car​

Sanaf Gulammustafa had denied that there were weapons of the boot of the Seat as he and others waited for the Skoda driven by Saqib Hussain to arrive at the Tesco car park.

He told the jury that he believed he was going home when the Seat moved around the car park but it came to a stop when the Skoda arrived. This, he told the court, was a "coincidence" as he believed he was going home.

He even claimed that he asked co-accused Raees Jamal why he wasn't being taken home

No-one told Gulammustafa about the ambush​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has insisted that none of the others at the scene of the alleged ambush did not tell him why they had driven to the Tesco car park.
"No-one told me, no. Raees [Jamal] said he was going to take me home," he said.
 

Why did Saqib Hussain call police?​

CCTV footage has been played to the court of the three cars involved on the night of February 11. The Skoda driven by Saqib Hussain led the way and was being followed by the Seat Leon said to be driven by Raees Jamal and the Audi TT driven by Mahek Bukhari.
It was around 30 seconds after the three cars were spotted on CCTV near Troon Way in Leicester that a phone call on Mr Ijazuddin's phone was made by Mr Hussain. However, Sanaf Gulammustafa did not understand why it had been made.
"Honestly, I do not know why that was. I'm not sure," he said.

Gulammustafa denies having 'active role'​

In his continued quizzing by Balraj Bhatia KC, Sanaf Gulammustafa has once again denied having a role in the events of February 11.
Mr Bhatia said: "I put it to you that you took an active part in the proceedings."
"No, I did not take any part in the proceedings," replied Gulammustafa.
 

Two cars were following Mr Hussain​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has acknowledged that two cars were following the Skoda being driven by Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin - confirming what Mr Hussain had claimed in his 999 call moments before the fatal crash.
Sanaf Gulammustafa also agreed that the two cars - the Seat Leon and the Audi TT - were trying to trap the Skoda along the A46.

Gulammustafa denies wearing balaclava​

In his call to police, Saqib Hussain claimed that a number of people in the two cars pursuing him were wearing balaclavas. Sanaf Gulammustafa has once again repeatedly denied he was one of them.
He confirms he was wearing a hooded top with a face mask, but not a balaclava and that he did not see his co-accused wearing balaclavas on the night of the crash.
 

Saqib Hussain got it 'completely wrong'​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has denied claims that the tinted windows of the Seat must have been down to allow Mr Hussain to see those in the car wearing balaclavas. Balraj Bhatia KC said this was the only way that balaclavas could have been seen.
However, Gulammustafa denied this.
"I was not wearing a balaclava. The car windows were never down. I was not wearing a mask in the car either. [Saqib] has got it clearly wrong."
 

Phone was not switched off​

Sanaf Gulammustafa has once again denied that he switched his phone off in and around the time of the crash on the A46.
Asked by prosecutors why he lied about the phone's battery dying, he adamantly replied: "The phone was not switched off. The phone died."

Gulammustafa's evidence concludes​

The case against Sanaf Gulammustafa has now come to an end. Court is taking a 15-minute break before the trial continues.

Is Natasha last up?
 

Natasha Akhtar called up​

Leicester Crown Court has now moved on to hear evidence from Natasha Akhtar in the witness box. The 22, of Alum Rock Road, Birmingham, is charged with murder but denies it.
Her is KC Timothy Raggat.
 

Akhtar did not know of either Mahek or Ansreen Bukhari​

In the opening of her time in the witness box, Natasha Akhtar confirmed that she did not know anything about either TikTok influencer Mahek Bukhari or her mother Ansreen.
Court also heard how she was a third-year student at Coventry University at the time of the crash on the A46. She also worked part-time in a Sainsbury's supermarket.

 

Akhtar and Raees Jamal were in a relationship​

Going over her links with the fellow co-accused, Natasha Akhtar confirmed she and Raees Jamal were in a relationship after first meeting on Instagram. The pair first met in October or November last year - four months before she was arrested by police.

Akhtar's father not aware of relationship​

Natasha Akhtar has revealed that her father was not aware of the relationship between herself and Raees Jamal due to his "strict" views. Her mother was aware though.
"I never told my dad about the relationship. He is a strict father. My mum was fine with it."
Akhtar also said that she had feelings for Jamal and that the relationship could have been taken further once she "got her life sorted" after completing her degree.
 

Akhtar claims Seat Leon was already damaged before collision​

Akhtar has claimed that damage allegedly caused to her Seat Leon in the crash on the A46 had in fact already been there for some time.
She told the jury that two wheels of the Seat were "scuffed", while one tyre had a bit of rubber missing from it. There was also damage to the front left headlight of the car following an incident in her native Birmingam weeks before the crash.
Damage to the rear of the car was allegedly caused in a car park when she either reversed into someone or someone collided with her car.
 

Akhtar claims to have never met victims​

Natasha Akhtat tells her KC Timothy Raggat that the first time she became aware of either Saqib Hussain or Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin was when she was arrested.
She claims to have never met the men or been aware of either of them prior to this.

Akhtar only had Raees Jamal's phone number​

Natasha Akhtar has denied having the phone numbers of the majority of her co-accused. She said the only number she had was that of Raees Jamal, her boyfriend's.
 
So far, I’m not finding any one of the accused entirely credible under questioning.

They were apparently too stoned, too distracted, too stressed, or too busy discussing Monopoly to notice a catastrophic car chase and almighty crash.

And as for their phones, malfunctioning to ghost dial, batteries running out, couldn’t be heard on speaker over the music…

Added to which, half of them supposedly didn’t know the rest and were just along for something to do, not noticing the other cars parked up.

Oh and none of them wore balaclavas (altho hoods up and Covid masks on in the car, windows up though).

JMO
 
So far, I’m not finding any one of the accused entirely credible under questioning.

They were apparently too stoned, too distracted, too stressed, or too busy discussing Monopoly to notice a catastrophic car chase and almighty crash.

And as for their phones, malfunctioning to ghost dial, batteries running out, couldn’t be heard on speaker over the music…

Added to which, half of them supposedly didn’t know the rest and were just along for something to do, not noticing the other cars parked up.

Oh and none of them wore balaclavas (altho hoods up and Covid masks on in the car, windows up though).

JMO
This whole charade is about damage limitation for the defendants it seems.

They know they will be found guitly to some degree. Take Natasha Akhtar who is on the stand. She said in a phone call from prison that she knows she will get a few years and that will be for assisting a murderer (offender).

If she did say the truth, that any form of harm was intended, it strengthen the prosecution case and she would have the other 7 defence barristers turning on her and saying she was directly involved.

We will get nothing from shrewd Nat.

IMO
 
This whole charade is about damage limitation for the defendants it seems.

They know they will be found guitly to some degree. Take Natasha Akhtar who is on the stand. She said in a phone call from prison that she knows she will get a few years and that will be for assisting a murderer (offender).

If she did say the truth, that any form of harm was intended, it strengthen the prosecution case and she would have the other 7 defence barristers turning on her and saying she was directly involved.

We will get nothing from shrewd Nat.

IMO
I wonder if the prosecution will try and wind her up by bringing up the fact she claimed to be in a relationship with Raees and he denied it...
 
@RusselSprout

Thanks for all the updates. I wonder if Natasha goes against the narrative.

I guessing not though.

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!?
 
I wonder if the prosecution will try and wind her up by bringing up the fact she claimed to be in a relationship with Raees and he denied it...
Mabe.. but im thinking she will know that Raees said that in an attempt to distance her from the allegations.
They deffo will probe her on it though. Raees did not do both of them any good by saying that.
 
Also, not only do we have the tragic loss of two young lives and the devastating grief of their families, but I'm guessing the financial burden of this case to the British taxpayer will be huge. I'm sure they will all be on legal aid which means 8 sets of legal teams, including barristers, in a 6 week (?) trial, no doubt followed by a string of appeals. Natasha won't be finishing her university degree and will have a criminal record for the rest of her life. All because Ansreen had an affair with an 18 year old and didn't want her husband to find out. Absolutely sickening.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
774
Total visitors
863

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,740
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top