Appeal Court Rubber - Stamps Entrapment of Naweed, Khobaib, Mohibur, & Tahir

Entrapment: Wherein, the police/CID with malice aforethought, incite a person or persons to plot/commit a crime and whence the person/persons have committed to carrying out the crime. Arrest and charge the person/persons with conspiracy to break the law.

Every court has an inherent power and duty to prevent abuse of its process. This is a fundamental principle of the rule of law. By recourse to this principle courts ensure that executive agents of the state do not misuse the coercive, law enforcement functions of the courts and thereby oppress citizens of the state. Entrapment, is an instance where such misuse may occur. It is simply not acceptable that the state through its agents should lure its citizens into committing acts forbidden by the law and then seek to prosecute them for doing so. That would be entrapment. That would be a misuse of state power, and an abuse of the process of the courts. The unattractive consequences, frightening and sinister in extreme cases, which state conduct of this nature could have are obvious. The role of the courts is to stand between the state and its citizens and make sure this does not happen.
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Regina V Looseley, October 2001

Naweed, Khobaib, Mohibur, & Tahir. On 3rd August 2017 were all sentenced to life imprisonment, they appealed against their convictions on the 18th October 2018, the judges at that date reserved their judgement and handed it down on the 2nd November 2018. They said: ‘Standing back from the grounds of appeal, we have considered whether anything put before us casts doubt on the safety of the convictions.  We are satisfied that there is nothing which does so.’ 

A secret police unit, combined with the Security Service (MI5), decided to run an undercover operation in an attempt to obtain evidence of terrorism, to this extent. In the summer of 2016, officers of the West Midlands Police established a fake business in Birmingham called Hero Couriers.  They did so as part of an undercover operation intended to observe and engage with Khohaib and Naweed, who were suspected of involvement in terrorism-related activity. A number of undercover police officers played the roles of members of staff at Hero Couriers. In particular, an undercover officer known as Vincent posed as the manager.  Another undercover officer, whose evidence featured prominently at trial, was known as Andy. Mohibur & Tahir were dragged into this for their association with Khohaib and Naweed. On 3rd August 2017, they were all sentenced to life imprisonment.

The Disturbing Key Features in Their Case

1. The shocking realisation that in 2017, despite every development in the UK criminal justice system, defendants who were not guilty of the charges brought against them can nevertheless be convicted by a jury.

2. The even more shocking appreciation that the jury that convicted the four after a five-month trial, heard key police witnesses clearly lying about the primary evidence on which they had to decide guilt or innocence.

3. Not only did the jury, furthermore, hear patently false evidence given on oath by police witnesses, but got to see more than a thousand deleted messages from the personal phones of police witnesses as they communicated with each other during the course of the month in which the wrongful arrests and prosecutions of the men were clearly being planned and achieved – messages that extended into the period of the trial itself as the police witnesses tried to contact each other and match the evidence they gave to the jury to other evidence appearing more and more dramatically (that contradicted what they said) as the case proceeded.

What was particularly outrageous, was the continuation of the judges to give anonymity to Vincent and Andy both undercover policemen, who were the principal witnesses on behalf of the prosecution. Therefore, preventing the fours legal teams’ legal team from assessing/establishing the credibility of both police officers, the defence team argued, to quote from the judgement:

'anonymity which had at an early stage been granted to the witnesses Vincent and Andy should be lifted. On behalf of the applicants Ali and Hussain in particular, it was submitted that the effect of the anonymity had been that the defence had been precluded from investigating and testing issues relevant to the credibility of the evidence of those witnesses. In particular, it was submitted, there had been no opportunity to investigate or test any previous allegations made against either Vincent or Andy of planting evidence; to know whether or not the fingerprints and/or DNA of either Vincent or Andy were on the JD Sports bag or any of its contents; or to investigate whether Vincent might have possessed, purchased or been able to purchase any of the items found in the bag.  It was further submitted that there had been an improper failure by the police to investigate those matters, and a failure by the prosecution to ensure that there was a proper investigation of them. 

No need to tell you that the judges didn’t give an inch on this or on anything else for that matter!

Mariam Hussain, sister of Khobaib said, all four men were under 24/7 surveillance for months prior to the arrest and there is no evidence linking them to the JD sports bag which was planted.

The four will fight on!

Mohibur Rahman: A3480AZ, HMP Full Sutton, Stamford Bridge, YO4 1PS
Naweed Ali: A0531CJ, HMP Frankland, Brasside, DH1 5YD
Khobaib Hussain: A0537CJ, HMP Long Lartin, South Littleton, Evesham, WR11 8TZ
Tahir Aziz: A8301DV, HMP Whitemoor, Long Hill Road, March, PE15 0PR

Read more: Campaign for the Four Wrongly Convicted Birmingham Defendants

70 Citizenss Fitted up by West Midlands Police who had Their Convictions Quashed