Why aren't the teenagers who killed Bhim Kohli being named?

Yahoo

08-04-2025

A 15-year-old boy and 13-year-old girl have been found guilty at Leicester Crown Court of the manslaughter of 80-year-old Bhim Kohli following an attack in a park near Leicester in September.
The elderly dog walker was racially abused and brutally attacked in Franklin Park in Braunstone Town, just yards away from his home, before dying in hospital the following day.
Standing in the dock at Leicester Crown Court today, the teenagers appeared upset when the foreman of the jury returned the guilty verdicts. Judge Mr Justice Turner adjourned the pair's sentencing until 20 May.
After the jury reached its unanimous verdicts following six hours and 46 minutes of deliberation, the judge further remanded the 15-year-old boy in custody and granted the 13-year-old female defendant bail.
After telling the jury he wanted further background information on the defendants before passing sentence, the judge told the girl: 'I want to make it absolutely crystal clear that the fact that bail is being granted should not be taken as any indication as to the sentence when the time comes.'
Currently the two defendants cannot be legally named because of their age.
Mr Justice Turner said he will consider a media application to lift reporting restrictions on 19 May, but it is not clear if this relates to naming the two teenagers publicly.
Section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act (YJCEA) 1999 gives a Crown or adult magistrates' court the power to make a reporting restriction order for any child before them – including defendants.
Automatic reporting restrictions apply to any child concerned in youth court proceedings, under Section 49 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.
While the Children and Young Persons Act states that unless there is a statutory requirement or compelling reason, cases involving children should be heard in the youth court, there are some exceptions.
Government guidance says that for "serious crimes, like murder or rape, the case starts in the youth court but will be passed to a Crown Court".
If this happens, as was the case for Bhim Kohli's killers, a Crown Court would have to impose a discretionary restriction under Section 45 of the YJCEA to protect a child defendant's identity.
Even before court proceedings have begun, media organisations usually avoid identifying any child who has been arrested on suspicion of a crime.
This is partly for ethical reasons, and also because it could later lead to court proceedings where reporting restrictions are activated.
Press regulator IPSO says editors should 'generally avoid naming children under the age of 18 after arrest for a criminal offence but before they appear in a youth court unless they can show that the individual's name is already in the public domain, or that the individual (or, if they are under 16, a custodial parent or similarly responsible adult) has given their consent'.
"This does not restrict the right to name juveniles who appear in a crown court, or whose anonymity is lifted," the guidance adds.
Section 45 of the YJCEA allows courts to lift restrictions on identifying child defendants for the following reasons:
The effect of the restrictions imposes a "substantial and unreasonable restriction on the reporting of the proceedings".
It is in the public interest to remove or relax that restriction.
"Prior to conviction the welfare of the child or young person is likely to take precedence over the public interest," the Crown Prosecution Service says.
"After conviction, the age of the defendant and the seriousness of the crime of which they have been convicted will be particularly relevant."
The bar for public interest in naming child defendants is fairly high, as shown by guidance from the cases of McKerry v Teesdale and Wear Justices (2000) and Damien Pearl v Kings Lynn Justices (2005).
In these cases, the public interest was in public protection, but was served by a partial lifting of reporting restrictions: permitting publication of names but not photographs, addresses or schools.
In McKerry the court held: "It would be wholly wrong for any court to dispense with a juvenile's prima facie right to anonymity as an additional punishment.
"It is also very difficult to see any place for 'naming and shaming'. The... criterion that it is in the public interest to dispense with the reporting restriction must be satisfied."
Bhim Kohli was walking his dog through Franklin Park in Braunstone Town, Leicestershire, on the evening of Sunday, 1 September when he became the victim of a "serious assault", police said at the time.
Jurors were told Kohli suffered a broken neck and rib fractures which were consistent with 'something heavy striking the rib cage' and died in hospital the next evening.
The boy, who denied inflicting the fatal injuries, told a friend he would go 'on the run' to Hinckley, in Leicestershire, the day after the attack but was arrested by police minutes later while hiding in a bush, the court heard.
In a letter written two months after the attack, the court heard the boy said 'I did it and I accept I'm doing time' and 'I kinda just needed anger etc releasing'.
The boy told the jury he walked over to Kohli that evening, wearing a balaclava, because the girl told the group of five children that he 'carries a knife', before the man fell to his knees during a 'tussle' over the youth's slider.
The court was shown a video clip filmed by the girl of the masked boy slapping Kohli in the face with his shoe, which he told the jury he did out of 'instinct'.
In another clip taken by the girl, who was alleged to be laughing in one of the videos, Kohli could be seen lying motionless on his side in the park. The jury heard that when the victim was found injured in the park, he told his daughter that he had been called a 'P***' during the attack.
Five children – a boy and a girl aged 14 and one boy and two girls aged 12 – were arrested on suspicion of murder shortly after the attack, but four were released without further action.
At the time, Kohli's family said in a statement: 'Our hearts have been completely broken. He really was such a loving, caring person whose life was centred around his family.
"Bhim was a loving husband, dad and grandad. He was also a son, brother and uncle. He adored his grandkids with all his heart and loved spending time with them.
"He really was such a loving, caring person whose life was centred around his family. He has always been a very hardworking man and even at the age of 80 he was still very active.
'One of his great passions was his allotment, he would go every day to tend to his plots and was so proud of them. He also enjoyed walking the family dog Rocky on the park many times a day.
'Bhim loved to laugh. He was always very happy and talkative, the joker of the family and always loved to outsmart us with a smile."
Read more
Will killers be forced to face victims' families in court during sentencing? (Yahoo News)
MoJ responds after reports Southport killer Axel Rudakubana was beaten up in Strangeways prison (Manchester Evening News)
Why Axel Rudakubana did not receive a whole-life order (Yahoo News)
Click below to see the latest East Midlands headlines