EXCLUSIVE Ultimate backpacker nightmare: British woman is living on the streets in South America after being violently robbed of her passport and all her money
A British woman who went to Peru on a yoga retreat to 'find herself' has spent the last month sleeping rough after her passport and money were stolen in a violent robbery.
Hannah Almond, 32, a fashion graduate from Grimsby, was left stranded, penniless and unable to contact her family after the attack, with all her remaining belongings torched by local thugs.
She has befriended an elderly homeless man who she believes is the only person she can trust and now lives in a ramshackle camp under the Belén Bridge in Cusco.
Now her desperate friends have launched a GoFundMe page to cover the costs of sending her relatives to Peru to track her down and bring her home, as trauma from the attack has left her too scared to accept help from embassy officials.
A family friend told MailOnline: 'She is one of the most pure loving souls ever - she is very generous and always wants to help people. 'But she does not trust anyone after getting robbed and assaulted. Some locals burned all her belongings from under the bridge.
'She was contacting her mum every now and then through other people's phones.
'Police went to check on her two days ago and she has not been seen since. Cusco is a trafficking hotspot, so it's very worrying.'
The story has made national news in Peru with one website reporting the situation has left locals bewildered.
Mark Atkinson, the British Consul in Peru, told local media Hannah arrived in Cusco in early March as a tourist and did not plan to overstay her visa however her immigration status is now in limbo.
'She is in an illegal situation. Her tourist visa has already expired,' Atkinson explained.
Adding that the embassy is coordinating with local police and has also offered direct support including hotel accommodations and money for food but she keeps returning to the same bridge.
'Sometimes we've paid for hotel stays, given her money for food, that sort of thing. But she always ends up coming back here,' he added.
A message on the fundraising page adds: 'Hannah travelled to Peru in March hoping for an adventure, but instead, she has found herself in a terrifying and heartbreaking situation.
'She was robbed and assaulted, losing her passport, phone, and all of her money. Since then, Hannah's mental health has severely declined.
'Despite attempts to help her through official channels, Hannah is deeply fearful and unable to accept support from the embassy or local authorities. She is extremely vulnerable, isolated, and not safe living on the streets of Peru.
'Hannah is a deeply kind and gentle soul, and we are desperate to get her the care and safety she deserves. We need to bring her home.'
More than 100,000 Brits travel to Peru every year with most stopping in Cusco which is the gateway to Machu Picchu and the Inca Trail.
FCO travel advice warns a number of Brit tourists have been targeted by armed robbers in recent years. It adds: 'Personal attacks, including sexual assaults, are infrequent but do happen, mostly in the Cusco and Arequipa areas.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Fears of tent cities as rough sleeping is decriminalised in end to 200-year-old law
Tent cities could pop up across the UK as rough sleeping is decriminalised, critics of the policy say. Ministers have announced plans to repeal the Vagrancy Act by next spring, meaning it will no longer be an offence to sleep on pavements. But there are fears scrapping the 200-year-old law despite rising numbers of the homeless will mean more people camping on the streets. Announcing the changes, Angela Rayner said she was 'drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice towards some of the most vulnerable in society'. The Housing Secretary pledged to increase funding for homelessness services with an extra £233million this financial year to provide alternatives to rough sleeping. She said: 'No one should ever be criminalised simply for sleeping rough and by scrapping this cruel and outdated law, we are making sure that can never happen again.' Introduced in 1824 to tackle a homelessness crisis after the Industrial Revolution, the law was designed to punish 'idle and disorderly persons, and rogues and vagabonds'. Most parts of the act have been repealed but some remain in force in England and Wales to enable police to move on rough sleepers rather than prosecute them. Homeless charities called the move a 'landmark moment' they had long called for. However, there were concerns that the move could lead to more people sleeping on streets and the creation of 'tent cities'. The charity Shelter estimates there are 326,000 people, including 161,500 children, in England who are homeless, a 14 per cent increase on the previous year. This has caused camps to pop up in several cities, including on Park Lane in central London. Figures published in April showed the total number sleeping rough in the capital – those who spend at least one night on the streets – was 4,427 for the three months to March 2025, which was a near 8 per cent increase from 4,118 for the same quarter last year. The numbers classed as living on the streets had risen by 38 per cent year-on-year to 706 from 511. The Government said 'targeted measures will ensure police have the powers they need to keep communities safe – filling the gap left over by removing previous powers'. These will be new offences of facilitating begging for gain and trespassing with the intention of committing a crime and will be brought in through amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill. Ministers said this will ensure organised begging – often by criminal gangs – remains an offence, meaning it is unlawful for anyone to organise others to beg. Ms Rayner's department said spending on homeless services would hit nearly £1billion this financial year. Kevin Hollinrake, Tory communities spokesman, said: 'Labour's approach will result in a pavement free-for-all in our towns and cities. They just don't understand or care how this affects law-abiding local residents and the impact it has on their pride of place.' Chris Philp, the Tory home affairs spokesman, told the Telegraph: 'This move risks turning British cities into a version of San Francisco, which has become overrun by encampments of homeless people.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Has deporting illegals become illegal?
The circus around Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia – whose full name the New York Times likes to trot out as if citing an old-school English aristocrat – speaks volumes about the immigration battle roiling the US. Our friend Kilmar is what we fuddy-duddies insist on calling an illegal immigrant. The Salvadoran crossed clandestinely into the US in 2012. As for what he's done since, that depends on whom you ask. According to his GoFundMe page, Kilmar is a 'husband, union worker and father of a disabled five-year-old'. Left-wing media portray 'the Maryland man' – a tag akin to Axel Rudakubana's 'a Welshman' – as an industrious metalworker devoted to his family. His wife has rowed back on the temporary protective order she once requested, claiming she'd been over-cautious. Yet according to the Trump administration, Kilmar is a member of the notoriously violent street gang MS-13 who's derived his primary source of income from smuggling hundreds of illegals over the southern border for several years. Choose A or B. In 2019, Kilmar was arrested for loitering along with three other men, one a suspected MS-13 member. He was carrying marijuana, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. From his clothing, tattoos and, more persuasively, a 'past proven and reliable' confidential source who verified he was an active gang member using the moniker 'Chele', police adjudged that Kilmar was a gangbanger, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. He was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement – whose acronym, ICE, reinforces its rep as cold-hearted – which moved to deport him. Kilmar (of course) contested his removal. The immigration judge hearing Kilmar's case concurred that the defendant was indeed a gang member and deportable; the Salvadoran (of course) appealed the decision, which nevertheless was upheld. Kilmar (of course) then filed for asylum, as well as for a 'withholding of removal'. A subsequent immigration judge stayed his deportation to his home country, where his wellbeing might be endangered by local gangs. Now, you might suppose that putting yourself in the way of other famously rivalrous gangs would come with the territory when you join one yourself. Like, inter-gang violence seems a natural hazard of this line of work. But it's not only British immigration judges who are soft touches. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the millions of gate-crashers Kilmar (of course) remained in the US. In 2022, he was pulled over for speeding while driving eight other Hispanic men of uncertain immigration status in an SUV altered to add a third row of seats for extra passengers. The officers suspected human-trafficking; Kilmar's driving licence had expired; a run of his number plate through the database turned up a federal note on likely membership of MS-13. Yet when the patrolmen contacted the feds, ICE (of course) declined to pick him up. So Kilmar was (of course) released without charge. Even so, his claim that he was merely transporting construction workers between jobs did not, under investigation, hold up. Fast-forward to 2025 and why this otherwise obscure Salvadoran who is or is not a thug merits such a detailed lowdown. Meaning (of course) that this case has to do with Donald Trump – whose evil minions in March flew more than 230 purported criminals to a Salvadoran prison, including none other than Kilmar, whom ICE did finally pick up (no 'of course' there). The flights' timing was judicially dodgy. The planes did or didn't take off after a federal judge ruled that the flights could not proceed until the deportees were given the opportunity to challenge their removal. The administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which directed Trump to 'facilitate' Kilmar's return to the US. Because, remember, there was only one country to which he could not be deported because of that credulous 2019 decision: his own. Hence the Justice Department's acceptance that Kilmar's deportation was an 'administrative error'. During this proxy war with Trump, Democrats have pretended to hair-tear over poor Kilmar, mouldering away in a nasty foreign prison and deprived of due process. But the story I just laid out has due process, not to mention leniency or even dereliction on the part of the authorities, up the wazoo. Meanwhile, after slyly getting their jurisprudential ducks in a row, last week Trump and co finally got Kilmar flown back to the US, only to arrest him immediately for human-trafficking – with every intention of convicting the guy and then deporting him right back to El Salvador. What do we make of this farce? The American commentariat has focused on a potential showdown between Trump and the judiciary, claiming to fear a flat-out executive refusal to follow court orders but secretly rather hoping that Trump does defy the courts and thus reveals himself as an unconstitutional tyrant. I view this absurd tale through a different lens. All these trials and flights for a lone illegal alien are expensive. The amount of 'due process' the American justice system affords every single illegal makes deportation at any scale impossible. There isn't enough time and money and there aren't nearly enough judges to make any but a token gesture toward the mass deportation of illegals that Trump has promised. That amounts to a victory not just for Democrats but also for disorder. I'd assess the odds that Kilmar is a thug at about 90 per cent. But proving membership of unofficial allegiances in court is a bastard. If every individual deportation case must be adjudicated according to exacting evidentiary rules and appeal procedures, America's drastic, undemocratic demographic change will proceed inexorably. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the staggering ten million gate-crashers during the Biden administration alone. What are the chances of that? In New York at the weekend, ICE raids were impeded by LA-style crowds of righteously indignant protestors screaming: 'Let them go! Let them go!' The officers just doing their jobs looked beleaguered, tired, numb and pre-defeated. After all the ICE agents' thankless labours, what proportion of their detainees will still get to stay in the country in the end? I'll take another stab at 90 per cent.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Sick robbers who broke into war veteran's home and threatened him with a knife before taking off with his MEDALS are jailed
A pair of robbers who broke into the home of a vulnerable war veteran and threatened him with a knife before stealing his medals have been jailed. Peter Ratcliffe, 48, and Ann Marie Simpson, 38, broke into the pensioner's accommodation in South Shields in July 2023. They pushed the elderly man to the floor and threatened him with a knife before stealing his prized possessions including his bank cards, his passport and his wedding ring. The robbers also made off with the veteran's war medals. The victim was not left with any serious injuries but was extremely shaken and traumatised from the robbery, a court heard. Ratcliffe and Simpson were identified by CCTV and were arrested just hours later. Officers found clothing which matched the outfits being warn by the robbers on the CCTV footage, Chronicle Live reported. They were both charged with robbery and remanded into custody the following day. Earlier this year, both pleaded guilty at Newcastle Crown Court. Ann Marie Simpson, 38, was sentenced to five years and four months imprisonment after pleading guilty to robbery and witness intimidation Simpson also admitted one count of witness intimidation after she sent a letter to the victim telling him to drop the charges against them. On Friday, both were both jailed at a sentencing hearing at Newcastle Crown Court. Ratcliffe, of Trinity Walk, South Shields, was sentenced to seven years and four months behind bars. Simpson, of Johnson Street, also South Shields, was sentenced to five years and four months imprisonment. Both were given a ten-year restraining order, preventing them from contacting the victim. Sergeant Kimberley Ball, of Northumbria Police said: 'This was a cruel and targeted attack on an elderly man in his own home – because of his vulnerabilities. 'I want to thank the victim for his patience and courage throughout this entire process, which I know has been extremely difficult. 'I have no doubt the streets of South Tyneside are safer now these two criminals are behind bars where they belong.'
