BREAKING NEWS Man appears in court charged with cruelty and fraud after 37 dogs found dead at 'Save a Paw UK' rescue centre during police raid over 'missing animals'
A dog rescue centre owner appeared in court today charged with four offences of animal cruelty and fraud after the remains of 37 dead dogs were found at his premises.
Police, RSPCA officers and council staff raided Save A Paw UK in Crays Hill, Essex, on Tuesday following concerns about 'missing' pets at the organisation run from Oaveed Rahman's home.
Southend Magistrates Court heard that Rahman, 25, who gave his first name as Obi, took in animals from owners who could no longer keep them, with the promise of rehoming them for a fee.
He is charged with one count of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal between November 1, 2024, and May 14, 2025, by a failure to act, in that he failed to keep alive 37 dogs, and he knew or ought to have known the effects or likely effects.
It was also alleged that between December 25, 2024, and May 1, 2025, he falsely represented to a woman that he was running a charitable organisation involved in the rehoming of dogs intending to cause her a loss or a risk of a loss.
A second fraud charge, relating to a period between November 28, 2024, and May 14, 2025, started he fraudulently represented that he had rehomed a dog, intending to cause an individual a loss or a risk of a loss.
The third fraud charge was that between January 31 and May 14, 2025, Rahman fraudulently represented that he had rehomed another dog causing an individual a loss or a risk of loss.
Rahman, dressed in a grey tracksuit, denied all four charges.
Prosecutor Rebecca Debenham said: 'He set up and represented as a charity Save a Paw UK offering services to those who had dogs and wanted the dogs to be rehomed.
'He took payments on the understanding he would rehome them, but unfortunately that was not the case.
'At Mr Rahman's home, where police and partners attended, the bodies of 37 dogs were found with other dogs living in his garden.'
The court heard he could face a maximum of two years in prison for the cruelty charge and 18 months for each fraud offence.
'Further enquiries are being carried out by the police... this is transpiring to be a nationwide situation,' Ms Debenham added.
The court was also told the defendant had been evicted from the property where the dogs were found.
No bail application was made and Chairman of the Bench Anne Wade said Rahman would remanded in custody to appear at Basildon Crown Court on June 9.
A second man who was arrested during the search has been released on police bail until July.
An Essex Police spokesperson said previously: 'Essex Police officers worked alongside colleagues from the RSPCA and Basildon Council in response to a number of reports in relation to an address the Crays Hill area.
'The partners carried out a joint visit to the property, in the Crays Hill area on Tuesday 13 May.'
Before being charged Rahman had hit out at critics on Facebook and denied any wrongdoing.
In a recent Facebook post he confronted negative claims, writing: 'I've personally taken down few dog fighters and saved their dogs with staples and all sorts of dodgy repairs to their bodies.
'I taken in the worst of worst kind of dogs reactive with bite history then rehabilitate them.'
Supporters also posted comments including: 'Ignore the haters - those of us who know you and who have actually visited your rescue know it's lies.'
Inspector Steve Parry, of the Basildon neighbourhood policing team, said yesterday: 'This has been an extremely intensive investigation – to have secured such significant charges within 36 hours of making an arrest is a real testament to the unwavering commitment of the officers here in Basildon.
'The public sentiment surrounding this investigation is not lost on us and I would continue to urge the public to be responsible when discussing this, both online and in person.
'We are also acutely aware there will be a number of people, potentially across the UK, who may have questions on the current situation or information which they want us to know about.
'We have now set up a dedicated public portal through which we would ask for people to make contact. This will allow is to continue to collate key evidence as the case progresses through the justice system and I would urge people to please use this method to get in contact.
'As I've said before, this is likely to be a complex and potentially far-reaching investigation, and one which we won't be able to give running commentary – but we will endeavour to keep the public informed on this investigation when it is appropriate to do so.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
15 minutes ago
- The Sun
Six members of Russian spy ring to have ‘too lenient' jail sentences reviewed
SIX members of a Russian spy ring are to have their jail sentences reviewed for being too lenient, we can reveal. The Bulgarians — who lived and worked in the UK — plotted sex stings, and targeted Russian dissidents and journalists critical of President Vladimir Putin 's war effort against Ukraine. 7 7 The ring included lab worker Katrin Ivanova, 33, and beauty shop owner Vanya Gaberova, 30 — dubbed 'killer sexy brunettes' by cell leaders. Ivanova got nine years and eight months and Gaberova eight years. They were both found guilty in March of breaching the Official Secrets Act by conspiring to provide information useful to an enemy between August 2020 and February 2023. Ivanova also got a concurrent sentence of 15 months for forged ID documents. All six got a total of more than 50 years last month. The Attorney General's Office has been asked to consider the sentences under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme. The ULS scheme allows anyone to ask for a Crown Court sentence to be assessed by the Attorney General's office if they think it is too lenient. Law officers have 28 days from sentencing to make a decision. 7 7 7 7 7
BBC News
29 minutes ago
- BBC News
Sheku Bayoh: Hearing to decide whether chair should resign begins
A former judge who is chairing a £50m public inquiry into the death of a man in police custody will hear arguments on Thursday on whether he should step down or see the job Scottish Police Federation has accused Lord Bracadale of holding "secret" meetings with the family of Sheku Bayoh, who died after being restrained by police in Kirkcaldy in organisation which represents rank and file officers believes the five meetings could lead to "perceived bias" and has called for him to "recuse" Bracadale has been leading the inquiry since 2020 and ordered the hearing to allow core participants to make submissions on his conduct. If Lord Bracadale decides to stay in post, the federation has said it will seek a judicial departure and the search for a last minute replacement after five years of work would delay the inquiry's findings by many has already cost the public purse £24.8m, with an additional £24.3m spent by Police Scotland, including £17.3m of legal stage is now set for a robust exchange of legal arguments between senior lawyers. Roddy Dunlop KC, dean of the Faculty of Advocates, will represent the police federation and two of the officers involved in the incident which ended with Mr Bayoh's police federation has said that none of the other core participants were made aware that Lord Bracadale was meeting the family and the details of what was said have not been federation's general secretary David Kennedy has said it has lost confidence in the inquiry because not all core participants were being treated Bayoh family's solicitor Aamer Anwar has described the federation's actions as "a pathetic and desperate attempt to sabotage the inquiry" at the 11th claimed the hearing could cost taxpayers "in excess of a million pounds" in fees for "police lawyers." Competing arguments One of England's top barristers, Jason Beer KC, has been brought in as senior counsel for the inquiry is expected to argue that Lord Bracadale's actions were procedurally appropriate because of the importance of maintaining the family's prosecution service, the Crown Office, will state its position, along with Police Scotland, the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner and the Commission for Racial Equality and representing other police officers involved in the case will also have the opportunity to have their hearing is scheduled to last two days, with Lord Bracadale issuing his decision at a later inquiry has been examining what happened before and during the death of Sheku Bayou, who died in police custody. It has been looking at how the police dealt with the aftermath, the investigation into Mr Bayoh's death and whether race was a of the public called the police after Mr Bayoh was spotted carrying a knife and behaving erratically in the streets of Kirkcaldy on May 3, wasn't carrying the knife when officers arrived at the scene but a violent confrontation followed, with up to six officers restraining the 31-year-old on the father-of-two lost consciousness and later died in hospital.
The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
High Court hears company linked to Baroness Michelle Mone must pay back £121m for ‘faulty' PPE
A company linked to Tory peer Michelle Mone should pay back more than £121 million for breaching a Government contract for 25 million surgical gowns during the coronavirus pandemic, the High Court has heard. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is suing PPE Medpro for allegedly breaching a deal for the gowns, with lawyers for the Government telling the court they were 'faulty' because they were not sterile. The company, a consortium led by Baroness Mone's husband, businessman Doug Barrowman, was awarded Government contracts by the former Conservative administration to supply PPE during the pandemic, after she recommended it to ministers. Both have denied wrongdoing. The Government is seeking to recover the costs of the contract, as well as the costs of transporting and storing the items, which amount to an additional £8,648,691. PPE Medpro said it 'categorically denies' breaching the contract, and its lawyers claimed the company has been 'singled out for unfair treatment'. Opening the trial on Wednesday, Paul Stanley KC, for the DHSC, said: 'This case is simply about whether 25 million surgical gowns provided by PPE Medpro were faulty. 'It is, in short, a technical case about detailed legal and industry standards that apply to sterile gowns.' Mr Stanley said in written submissions the 'initial contact with Medpro came through Baroness Mone', with discussions about the contract then going through one of the company's directors, Anthony Page. Baroness Mone remained 'active throughout' the negotiations, Mr Stanley said, with the peer stating Mr Barrowman had 'years of experience in manufacturing, procurement and management of supply chains'. But he told the court Baroness Mone's communications were 'not part of this case', which was 'simply about compliance'. He said: 'The department does not allege anything improper happened, and we are not concerned with any profits made by anybody.' In court documents from May this year, the DHSC said the gowns were delivered to the UK in 72 lots between August and October 2020, with £121,999,219.20 paid to PPE Medpro between July and August that year. The department rejected the gowns in December 2020 and told the company it would have to repay the money, but this has not happened and the gowns remain in storage, unable to be used. In written submissions for trial, Mr Stanley said 99.9999% of the gowns should have been sterile under the terms of the contract, equating to one in a million being unusable. The DHSC claims the contract also specified PPE Medpro had to sterilise the gowns using a 'validated process', attested by CE marking, which indicates a product has met certain medical standards. He said 'none of those things happened', with no validated sterilisation process being followed, and the gowns supplied with invalid CE marking. He continued that 140 gowns were later tested for sterility, with 103 failing. He said: 'Whatever was done to sterilise the gowns had not achieved its purpose, because more than one in a million of them was contaminated when delivered. 'On that basis, DHSC was entitled to reject the gowns, or is entitled to damages, which amount to the full price and storage costs.' In his written submissions, Charles Samek KC, for PPE Medpro, said the 'only plausible reason' for the gowns becoming contaminated was due to 'the transport and storage conditions or events to which the gowns were subject', after they had been delivered to the DHSC. He added the testing did not happen until several months after the gowns were rejected, and the samples selected were not 'representative of the whole population', meaning 'no proper conclusions may be drawn'. He said the DHSC's claim was 'contrived and opportunistic' and PPE Medpro had been 'made the 'fall guy' for a catalogue of failures and errors' by the department. He said: 'It has perhaps been singled out because of the high profiles of those said to be associated with PPE Medpro, and/or because it is perceived to be a supplier with financial resources behind it. 'In reality, an archetypal case of 'buyer's remorse', where DHSC simply seeks to get out of a bargain it wished it never entered into, left, as it is, with over £8 billion of purchased and unused PPE as a result of an untrammelled and uncontrolled buying spree with taxpayers' money.' He also said there was a 'delicious irony' that Baroness Mone was mentioned in the DHSC's written submissions, when she had 'zero relevance to the contractual issues in this case'. Neither Baroness Mone nor Mr Barrowman is due to give evidence in the trial, and Baroness Mone did not attend the first day of the hearing on Wednesday. A PPE Medpro spokesperson said the company 'categorically denies breaching its obligations' and will 'robustly defend' the claim. The trial before Mrs Justice Cockerill is due to last five weeks, with a judgment expected in writing at a later date.
