Influencer raised nearly €500k for 'needy Palestinians' but splashed donations on expensive cars and Rolex watches, court hears
The 34-year-old, who goes by Abdel Hamid on social media, pocketed the money through 37 online appeals made between 2021 and October 2024, a court heard.
Hamid, from Germany, garnered hundreds of thousands of followers on TikTok and Instagram before using the platforms to promote his alleged fundraising.
But, only a fraction of the money actually went to those in need.
Hamid confessed to committing donation fraud during his trial at Düsseldorf Regional Court on Monday.
Following a fundraising appeal 'for Palestine,' he gained €78,000 and purchased a BMW for €71,600 shortly after.
In total, he has pocketed €497,090.31.
The influencer also collected social benefits from the job center and a separate investigation is underway for welfare fraud, according to Bild.
When he was arrested in October 2024, investigators reportedly seized €20,000 in cash, along with luxury handbags, Rolex watches, and a limousine that was towed away.
The 34-year-old - who goes by Abdel Hamid on social media - pocketed the money through 37 online appeals made between 2021 and October 2024, a court heard. Pictured: This €14,000 Rolex (GMT Master Batman) was reportedly seized from Abdel Hamid's relative's appartment. Abdel Hamid himself had five Rolex watches, the authenticity of which is still being verified.
A €14,000 Rolex (GMT Master Batman) was seized from Abdel Hamid's sister's apartment, according to reports.
He himself had five Rolex watches, the authenticity of which is still being verified.
A suspected money laundering report had triggered the investigation.
Hamid is in custody and his trial is expected to continue on Thursday.
It comes as a mother of two was jailed last month after she robbed a charity of more than $500,000 to fund her lavish jetset lifestyle - then tried to buy her way out of a prison sentence.
Angela Stathopoulos, 49, spent her first night behind bars on April 8 after she admitted conning a charity for underprivileged kids and the homeless out of $531,111.
Melbourne County Court was told Stathopoulos paraded her luxury family holidays - paid for by the stolen money - on Instagram.
The court heard Stathopoulos 'acted like the charity's money was hers to spend' while she drained the Prahran Community Learning Centre dry.
Stathopoulos was the well-paid boss of the inner-east Melbourne charity - which survived on a shoestring budget - while she siphoned off the cash between May 2011 and March 2022.
The court heard Stathopoulos was on a huge six-figure salary with a $20,000 annual fuel allowance, and spent $155,274 on lavish trips including several first-class jaunts to the US.
Stathopoulos proudly displayed her illegally-funded holidays in a series of Instagram postcards featuring happy snaps from the exotic locations.
The holiday pics feature Stathopoulos and her husband and children living it up on premium trips to Disneyland, New York, Universal Studios and Hawaii.
Stathopoulos also bragged about her trips and showed off the photos to the hardworking, honest staff at the not-for-profit charity.
The court heard she went on the luxury jaunts while charity staff back in Melbourne struggled to make ends meet and crucial programs were being cancelled.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Migrant with grey hair was 15 when he crossed Channel, tribunal rules
An Afghan asylum seeker who arrived in the UK with grey hair was a child at the time, a judge has ruled. An asylum court ruled that the migrant, who came to Britain via a small boat after three failed attempts, was 15 despite starting to go grey on the side of his head. Authorities in the UK found that he was an adult when he arrived, saying he had an 'established jawline and lack of youthful glow'. But an upper immigration tribunal has overturned that decision, ruling that the 'stress' of his journey from Afghanistan might have led him to go grey. The asylum seeker, who has been given anonymity, had lodged an appeal at the Upper Tribunal following the decision by East Sussex County Council that he was 18 when he entered the UK in October 2022 and claimed asylum. A tribunal judgment said: 'He claims to have left Afghanistan in or around August 2021. He travelled through various countries including Iran, Turkey, Greece, Serbia, Hungary, Austria, Switzerland and France. 'Following three unsuccessful attempts to enter the UK, he arrived here by small boat on Oct 10 2022. 'In an interview with the Home Office shortly after his arrival, he explained that he had come to the UK 'for a better future, for better opportunities', that he would 'return to my country after I complete my studies in the UK' and that he had come here 'to support my family financially'.' Two weeks after arriving, he was placed with a foster carer by East Sussex County Council. A number of the council's social workers then conducted an age assessment because 'evidently there was some doubt as to whether he was as young as he claimed to be'. The judgment said: 'The assessors took into account that the [migrant] had been described as having an appearance older than his claimed age of 16, specifically some grey hair earlier in the report described as 'flecks' on the sides of his head and an 'established jawline and lack of youthful glow'. 'Furthermore, [he] had not grown out of his clothes or shoes during his journey to the UK and, by his own account, he had reached his 'adult height' before leaving Afghanistan in August 2021. He also appeared to have facial hair before starting his journey to the UK.' The assessors said his growth 'was not in keeping with that of other 16-year-old young men they had worked with'. They said his body was 'fully developed', he had 'established facial hair and body hair' as well as 'grey hairs which are in keeping with chronological ageing'. At the judicial review Upper Tribunal Judge Matthew Hoffman, criticised the council for relying on physical appearance. Judge Hoffman said: 'Physical appearance is a notoriously unreliable basis for determining a person's age, and this is not a case where it is asserted that the [Afghan man] looks so much older than his claimed age that this can be considered to be a reliable indicator. 'We also find that little weight can be attached to the fact ... that he has some grey hairs on the side of his head. It is not impossible for a teenager to have some grey hairs, but it is unusual. However, it does not seem to us to be much less unusual for a 19-year-old to have grey hairs than a 16-year-old. 'That is especially the case here, where there appears to have been some acknowledgement by the assessors that this may have been the result of the stress caused on his journey to the UK and that other possible explanations include vitamin deficiency and genetics. 'We also attach little weight to the evidence that he was shaving before he came to the UK. As the age assessment itself notes, 'the presence of facial hairs was not an uncommon feature of adolescent males from his ethnicity'. Mother told him his age Judge Hoffman said the tribunal could work out his age based on what his mother had told him when he was younger. 'We find that the [Afghan man] has been broadly consistent with his account that his mother told him his age when he was 14 years old so that he knew that he would need to fast during the next Ramadan when he would be 15,' Judge Hoffman said. 'We find it more likely than not that he is telling the truth when he claims that he was 15 years old when he arrived in the UK. After careful consideration, we find it more likely than not that he was born during Ramadan in 2006.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
McGregor continues appeal without fresh evidence
Conor McGregor's legal team has withdrawn a bid to introduce fresh evidence in his appeal against a decision in a civil case in which a woman accused him of raping her. Former hairdresser Nikita Hand, 35, sued the mixed martial arts fighter over an incident at a south Dublin hotel in December 2018. He was said to have 'brutally raped and battered' Ms Hand in a penthouse at the Beacon Hotel. During a three-week case at the High Court in Dublin last November, McGregor told the court he had consensual sex with Ms Hand. After six hours and 10 minutes of deliberating, the jury of eight women and four men found McGregor civilly liable for assault. Ms Hand was awarded 248,603.60 euro (about £206,000) in damages. McGregor was ordered by a judge to pay Ms Hand 100,000 euro (£85,000) of the damages and 200,000 euro (£170,000) of an expected 1.3 million euro (£1.1 million) in legal costs before the appeal, which the court heard had been done. Ms Hand, also known as Nikita Ni Laimhin, lost her case against another man, James Lawrence, who she accused of assaulting her by allegedly having sex without her consent at the same hotel. McGregor has since sought an appeal which was initially expected to include new evidence. On Tuesday morning, the Court of Appeal in Dublin heard that McGregor would no longer be relying on additional evidence that had not been given to the initial trial for his appeal. That evidence was reported to relate to two neighbours of Ms Hand who had alleged they had seen her be assaulted by a former partner. However, his legal team said that after receiving new applications relating to the evidence to be given by pathologist Professor Jack Crane, they could no longer sustain that ground of appeal. John Gordon, SC, for Ms Hand, said it was 'frankly not appropriate' for the ground to be withdrawn on that basis, adding he had only been told of the development 10 minutes earlier. He objected to the withdrawal of the ground and argued he should still be allowed to cross-examine the neighbours. He said his client had been 'put through the wringer yet again' and that the court should not permit the appellant to 'waltz in here and then they can walk away from this'. Mr Gordon said there could potentially be matters relating to perjury arising out of the developments. Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy, alongside Mr Justice Brian O'Moore and Mr Justice Patrick MacGrath, said it cannot be the case that further submissions relating to Prof Crane could solely be the reason to withdraw the appeal matter of the neighbours' evidence. Mark Mulholland KC, for McGregor, said he was applying to withdraw the matter on a 'holistic view' of the whole case and after taking instructions. Ms Justice Kennedy said it was 'unsatisfactory' that it was being brought to the court at a late stage, but permitted the withdrawing of the ground. Following the withdrawal of that application, Remy Farrell, SC, also for McGregor, advanced the remaining four grounds of the appeal – largely relating to the right to silence and 'no comment' answers to questions during garda interviews. He raised the issue of the cross-examination of McGregor during the original trial by Mr Gordon. He said an 'enormous amount of no comment material' had been entered into the hearings to no actual proper end. Mr Farrell said that Mr Gordon had raised more than 100 'no comment' answers given by McGregor while being interviewed by gardai on the basis that it related to a position put forward by the fighter that he had been fully co-operative with gardai. Mr Farrell said this was allowed to proceed by the trial judge, with Mr Justice Alexander Owens telling Mr Gordon multiple times to get to that specific purpose of that line of questioning. However, putting forward the appeal, McGregor's counsel said this did not occur – and was in itself based on an 'entirely incorrect' paraphrasing of what the appellant had actually said. Mr Farrell said his client had said that he had made a comment about wanting to 'get everything correct' in seeking out the 'best advice' from his solicitors – rather than saying he had been fully co-operative with gardai. He said the plaintiff had used this to construct a 'hook' that McGregor had said he wanted to tell everything to gardai, adding: 'With respect, that's not what it says.' Mr Farrell said it was not the case that McGregor had said he had told gardai everything. He said the matter was of 'totemic importance' in the trial, and that the jury was not entitled to draw any adverse inference from the no comment answers. He said it was 'manifestly wrong' and 'blatantly incorrect' for Mr Justice Owens to tell the jury the questioning was allowed as McGregor had raised his status as someone trying to sort out matters with the guards as best he can. Mr Farrell argued that the line of questioning was 'wholly impermissible' and was inviting someone to draw an inference that there was 'no smoke without fire' when invoking the right to silence. McGregor's counsel said the judge appeared to have 'somewhat lost control of the issue' and instead later told the jury during the charge that it could still be allowed for the different purpose of understanding background material to McGregor's answers and understanding the sequence of interviews and statements. He suggested the judge was 'scrambling for some other justification' for the admission of the evidence. Mr Farrell said there had been 'various vague circling' around a suggestion of whether McGregor had been co-operative or not, but it had at no point been put to him that he had been untruthful in his answers. He likened it to jazz afficiandos having to 'listen to the notes not played' but said this was 'simply incorrect' and would have 'profound implications' in cases. Meanwhile, he also raised an 'oddity' in the issue paper considered by the jury around potential distinctions between battery and sexual assault. The hearings continue.
BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Spanish tourist raped in Dublin city centre says she wants to meet attacker
A Spanish tourist who was raped in Dublin city centre during New Year's Eve celebrations has said she wants to meet her attacker in a safe space and ask him how he could have been so cruel. The prosecution will now look into providing restorative justice for the complainant to allow her to do this, with the court hearing that it is rarely utilised for victims in rape cases before the Central Criminal Court. Advertisement Christopher O'Grady (33), formerly of Muirhevnamor, Dundalk, Co Louth, was found guilty of one count of raping the then 19-year-old woman on January 1st, 2019, following a trial last March. He was homeless at the time. In her victim impact statement which was read out by prosecution counsel, Tony McGillicuddy SC, the woman said: 'I don't know why, but I want to meet him in a safe space and look him in the eyes and ask him what reason would anyone have to be so cruel to a young woman.' '...I want to know if he believes his own lies. I want him to truly see me and be forced to see himself as monstrous as I saw him.' She outlined the effects the rape have had on her, saying O'Grady turned her life upside down. 'He didn't see the person behind the body,' she said. Advertisement She described how she can no longer socialise or dance like she used to, is fearful of walking alone at night and is hypervigilant of other young women out at night. Padraig Dwyer SC, defending O'Grady, submitted his client was guilty of rape on the basis that he was reckless as to whether the young woman was consenting or not. He said O'Grady now accepts his guilt and wished to apologise to the victim for the hurt and pain he caused her. After some consultation with both O'Grady and the complainant, the court was told that they are both willing to engage in restorative justice. Ms Justice Caroline Biggs warned O'Grady that this does not mean he will not be serving a custodial sentence for his offending. She noted that any restorative justice process would need to be managed by appropriate individuals, given the effects of the crime on the complainant. Advertisement Mr McGillycuddy said he had some knowledge of restorative justice but was 'not aware of it being used for an offence of this nature'. 'I'm not sure how developed that system is or which agency would be appropriate to do it,' he said. Ms Justice Biggs adjourned the case to July 24th to give the prosecution time to look into the issue. The trial heard the woman had been in town to watch the New Year's Eve fireworks that night when she got separated from her friend and came into contact with O'Grady outside a shop. She told the court she was trying to find a bar to meet her friend and O'Grady walked her through town to a car park area where the alleged rape occurred. Advertisement The woman said she felt 'like a doll' and didn't have any strength in her body during the alleged incident. Afterwards, the court has heard, she walked with O'Grady back through the city centre for about 40 minutes, where she got talking to a couple – a man and woman - outside a shop and parted ways with O'Grady. The woman ended up in a B&B with the second man after the woman went home, where they had anal sex before the woman went home to her accommodation. She told the court it was painful, and she persuaded the man to stop. The trial was played CCTV footage of this encounter, which occurred in the hallway of the B&B. Ms Justice Biggs warned the jury that they may find this footage 'intrusive' and 'distressing', but she said she had made the decision that it needed to be shown in court as O'Grady had a constitutional right to put the evidence before them. When the complainant woke up the next morning, she told the court she 'realised I had two rapes and there might be a medical issue with that'. She went to hospital. The court heard no charge was brought against the second man, who gave evidence in the trial. Advertisement Sergeant Eoghan Kirwan told the court that O'Grady has 65 previous convictions, including public order offences, criminal damage, drugs and theft. He took a bench warrant while on bail for this offence and has been in custody since August 2024. Defence counsel said O'Grady was living a 'shambolic' lifestyle at the time of the offence, that he was homeless, begging on the streets and doing drugs.
