'Unduly lenient' jail terms for Keighley child sex abusers increased
Three men who sexually abused a vulnerable girl have had their prison terms increased after they were found to be "unduly lenient".Ibrar Hussain, 47, and brothers Imtiaz and Fayaz Ahmed, aged 62 and 45, were convicted of raping a girl in Keighley in the 1990s when she was aged 13 or 14.In January, Hussain was jailed for six and a half years, Imtiaz Ahmed for nine years and Fayaz Ahmed given seven and a half years.The Solicitor General referred the case to the Court of Appeal, with Hussain and Fayaz Ahmed's sentences increased to 10 years and Imtiaz Ahmed's term to 11 years.
During their trial, the court heard the victim moved to Keighley in the early 1990s and met the men, with the girl given money, drugs and alcohol in return for sex.Hussain and Fayaz Ahmed were 18 and 17 at the time, while Imtiaz Ahmed was in his 30s.In a statement read to the court, the victim said she still suffered flashbacks and the trauma left her unable to trust people, including the services there to protect her.Imtiaz and Fayaz Ahmed are believed to have absconded to Pakistan in 2023 and were sentenced in absentia.
Following their sentencing, Keighley and Ilkley MP Robbie Moore contacted the Attorney General to complain about the sentences.The Solicitor General Lucy Rigby KC MP said she had agreed with Moore and referred the sentences as they were "unduly lenient"."This case involved the shocking and hideous abuse of a vulnerable teenager by these three sexual predators," she said."I attended court today for the hearing and I very much welcome the Court of Appeal's significant increases to these sentences."
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
8 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Reviews opened into Tina Satchwell and Michael Gaine investigations
Garda Commissioner Drew Harris said that 'in hindsight' it may have been 'very obvious' where Mrs Satchwell's remains were secretly buried. Mr Harris said a report would be compiled and given to the Minister for Justice Jim O'Callaghan on Mrs Satchwell's disappearance, while the case of Mr Gaine is undergoing a peer review. Earlier this week, Richard Satchwell was given a life sentence for the murder of his wife Tina at their home in Co Cork. The British truck driver, 58, had denied murdering his wife between March 19 and March 20 2017. The jury at the Central Criminal Court in Dublin reached the unanimous verdict last Friday after nine hours and 28 minutes of deliberations. Mrs Satchwell's skeletal remain were found in a clandestine grave under the stairs of the couple's home in Co Cork in October 2023, more than six years after her husband reported her missing. The house was subject to a search in 2017, however nothing was discovered. In a separate case, the remains of Mr Gaine, a farmer from Co Kerry, were discovered in a slurry tank on his farmland in May, two months after he was reported missing by his wife. The farmyard had been previously searched as part of the probe. Speaking about the investigation into the disappearance of Mrs Satchwell, Mr Harris said the 2017 search did 'harvest' a 'huge information', which was useful in the re-examination of the case. Speaking at the Garda College in Templemore, Co Tipperary, Mr Harris said: 'All of those were crucial. So I would say the initial investigation was hamstrung because of the lack of information in comparison to the later re-examination of this matter. 'There's far more information to hand which gave us real grounds then for actual suspicion and then inquiries that we could lead. 'When you look at hindsight, some of these things can seem very obvious, but in the moment, what was known, what was being said in terms of sighting, what was being said in terms of the victim by her husband, and one has to recognise the victimology that was being applied here. 'His suppression of her, the coercive control that obviously she was subject to for many years, her isolation in that particular community, that meant that there was very few other people that we could speak to her… what Tina Satchwell's life was like. 'It was a complex investigation. Yes, the house was searched in 2017, forensic scientists also accompanied that search, it was subject to thorough examination and looked for blood splatter, none was found.' He said the initial investigation will be subject to a review. 'We have the expertise within the organisation, and obviously, then we report to the minister and to the Policing and Community Safety Authority, as is our responsibility. 'But I do think there are definitely lessons that we wish to learn from all of these homicides, where it's missing persons and then converts some time later to a homicide investigation.' He added: 'What I can say is, we've already reviewed all our missing person reports nationally. That was done last year. We found no other suspected homicide cases. 'Then following the Michael Gaine investigation, we're subjecting that to peer review, as I do think there's learning for us around those who would commit crime and then attempt to dispose of the body, and often are successful in disposing of the body.'
Telegraph
10 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Is Sir Keir Starmer a Right-wing extremist?
Is Sir Keir Starmer KC – Left-wing human rights lawyer, former director of public prosecutions, and Labour Prime Minister of the United Kingdom – a dangerous Right-wing extremist? Common sense, evidence and reality say emphatically not. Government materials issued as part of Prevent training programmes give a less clear answer. The Prime Minister's warning that uncontrolled migration risks turning Britain into an ' island of strangers ' would appear to risk falling foul of the definitions used in a Prevent course taken by thousands of public sector professionals with a duty to make referrals to the scheme. This defines 'cultural nationalism' as a type of extreme Right-wing terrorist ideology, including the belief that 'Western culture is under threat from mass migration and a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups'. Sir Keir is no more an extremist than any other writer who has expressed concern over the unprecedented scale and pace of migration and cultural change in recent years. Why, then, has the Government risked labelling him as such? The short answer is that, riddled with political anxieties over the composition of terrorism in Britain – 80 per cent of the Counter Terrorism Police network's live investigations involved Islamism in 2023, compared with 10 per cent for the extreme Right – Prevent has given the appearance of loosening the definition of the latter in order to provide an artificial 'balance' to its work. As the Shawcross Review found in 2023, the programme has adopted a 'double standard' when dealing with Islamists and the extreme Right. The results have been farcical, with an 'expansive' definition of Right-wing extremism capturing 'mildly controversial or provocative forms of mainstream, Right-wing leaning commentary that have no meaningful connection to terrorism or radicalisation' even while Prevent funded organisations whose leaders have publicly made statements 'sympathetic to the Taliban' and referred to militant Islamists as 'so-called 'terrorists' of the legitimate resistance groups'. Such absurdities might be overlooked if Prevent had also proved ruthlessly effective at preventing atrocities. It has not. Prevent has failed to identify dangerous and violent suspects on multiple occasions, including Southport killer Axel Rudakubana, who was referred and dismissed on three occasions before carrying out his attack. A deradicalisation programme that seems to show less interest in deradicalising potential terrorists than in policing Right-wing thought is unfit for purpose. It beggars belief that two years after the Shawcross Review we are once again having the same conversations. Prevent must be reformed – or if incapable of change, dismantled entirely.
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Labour spends £35k on pub beer mats to boast about minimum wage rise
Labour spent more than £35,000 of taxpayer cash on beer mats in pubs advertising the increase to the national minimum wage, a minister has admitted. The Government sent out promotional material to pubs across the country to tell workers that the minimum wage and national living wage were going up. Justin Madders, the employment minister, rationalised the £35,580 expense as he said the beer mats offered a 'unique opportunity to engage audiences in a social, high-dwell environment where financial conversations naturally occur'. The red and pale blue beer mats were government-branded and said: 'Millions got a pay rise.' 'National minimum and living wages went up on 1st April', it added, and displayed a barcode for customers to scan for details on how to 'make sure you're getting paid correctly'. The employment minister responded to a written question by Richard Holden, the shadow paymaster general, about the cost of the drink mats. He said: 'The cost to advertise in pubs using beer mats was £35,580, which was approved at official level.' He confirmed that the advertising push was approved by the Cabinet Office, and came out of the 2025 National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage campaign budget of £650,000. He added: 'The 2024 campaign saw an increase in reach to eligible workers. However, recognition remained low, reinforcing the need for bolder, more engaging formats for the 2025 campaign, which expected to deliver an estimated 3.2 million impressions. 'It offered a unique opportunity to engage audiences in a social, high-dwell environment where financial conversations naturally occur. 'This setting encourages discussion and word-of-mouth sharing about rate changes and offers an effective nudge for audiences to 'check their pay'.' 'We will be ruthless' Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have both pledged a war on waste in Whitehall, with the Government having taken such moves as freezing government credit cards and abolishing NHS England. The Prime Minister said in October: 'We will also be ruthless in clamping down on government waste, just as we will be ruthless on clamping down on tax avoidance ', emphasising the intention to show so the British people that 'every penny counts'. He added: 'Every single person in this country had to do that during the cost-of-living crisis and government must be no different.' The national living wage for those aged 21 and over rose from £11.44 per hour to £12.21 per hour, an increase of 6.7 per cent. The national minimum wage for those between 18 and 20 went up from £8.60 to £10 per hour, a 16.3 per cent boost. The Government has also begun to name and shame firms that do not pay their workers the appropriate wages, demanding they pay back what they owe and in some instances a further financial penalty.
