Rotherham sex-grooming suspect skips bail and flees to Pakistan

Rotherham sex-grooming suspect skips bail and flees to Pakistan

Andrew Norfolk

A key suspect in a police investigation triggered by the Rotherham sex-grooming scandal has skipped bail and fled to Pakistan.

Basharat Hussain, 38, was arrested last year on suspicion of multiple offences against young girls. Police said there was “no reason to believe he was a flight risk”. Mr Hussain, who was due to answer bail two days ago, flew to Pakistan last month. It was feared that he intends to remain in south Asia indefinitely.

An independent inquiry found last year that at least 1,400 children in Rotherham were subjected to “appalling levels of abuse” over 16 years until 2013.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article4466625.ece

01 Times 11 June 201502 Times 11 June 2015

.

38 thoughts on “Rotherham sex-grooming suspect skips bail and flees to Pakistan

  1. Er, now, let’s just get a handle on this. Our friend Hussain was banished by the Authorities beyond the outer limits of Rotherham, he is apparently a person of ‘Pakistani origin’, he appears to have been previously arrested in connection with sex grooming activities, he appears to be a prominent figure in the Rotherham sex grooming scandal – but he wasn’t considered a flight risk and so he was allowed to keep his passport?

    But oh! wait! he’s hopped on a plane to Pakistan – fancy, tut, oh bugger!!

    Perhaps he’s just gone on his jollies and he’ll be back when his fortnight’s up.

    Like

  2. He’s gone and with no extradition treaty with Pakistan it could be very difficult to get him back. The question now is how many more will follow him?

    Like

  3. Maybe time to publish the testimony of his victims and contact his family and new neighbours telling them of the risk he poses to their children?
    I think I shall submit an FOI asking for the names of those who advised against removing his passport and the grounds for doing so.

    Like

  4. I have submitted an FOI asking who gave the advice, who decided to accept it, what plans SYP have to discipline them for gross incompetence/corruption and how many other suspects have been allowed to keep their passports. I have also asked Sarah Champion to comment on this issue and I shall ring the SYP media office tomorrow.

    Like

  5. He’s just admitted his guilt, and more importantly, those of his mates and all those who covered this scandal up. @RR and Robin, I wonder what excuse you will use to defend this fine upstanding member of the communtiy?

    Like

  6. Naaaah Well blow me down with a feather !!! Here is me thinking they would stay put and cooperate , We are the laughing stock of the country in Rotherham , the Goonies would do a better job

    Like

  7. All of the Asian members with an official title are related politically.
    You scratch my back and I will scratch your back moto.
    Jahangir
    Mahroof
    Shoukat
    Qureshi
    Abbasi
    Nazir
    And I bet you any one else in those famous circles as it is a bridari thing.

    Any one disagree?

    Like

  8. I wouldn’t trust South Yorkshire police to see my dog across the road, if I was a conspiracy theorist I would be inclined to think that SYP deliberately allowed him to keep his passport; knowing full well he would run. I wonder how much of his ill gotten gains he has managed to take with him? The whole thing is a sick farce, wonder when we will here the usual crappy sentence, we have learned from this?

    I have just been to a meet the Commissioners meeting at the town hall, we had this ridiculous quiz; we had voting key pads and a load of questions came up on the screen and you pressed 1-5. A question came up about how serious should we be about protecting the children of Rotherham; so you imagine that a room full of parish councillors would vote hundred percent very seriously. The vote was 70%, 2% voted not to take it seriously at all. This is after the chief commissioner had made a speech about a new start. I never fail to be disgusted by the attitude of the Labour party in our area.
    Dave Smith

    Like

  9. From the Times article:
    “Police said there was “no reason to believe he was a flight risk”.
    When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn…

    Like

    • @rr
      “no reason to believe he was a flight risk”
      The full quote is ‘…after discussions with the crown prosecution service, the force decided it was not “proportionate to request he surrender his passport”.

      A) What did the CPS advise?
      B) What part of the discussions led to the decision not to remove his passport?

      Operational responsibility for the application of the criteria for issuance or refusal is a matter for the Identity and Passport Service (IPS) acting on behalf of the Home Secretary. The criteria under which IPS can issue, withdraw or refuse a passport is set out below.
      These are the persons who may be refused a British passport or who may have their existing passport withdrawn:
      a person for whose arrest a warrant had been issued in the United Kingdom, or a person who was wanted by the United Kingdom police on suspicion of a serious crime; or
      iii a person who is the subject of:
      a court order, made by a court in the United Kingdom, or any other order made pursuant to a statutory power, which imposes travel restrictions or restrictions on the possession of a valid United Kingdom passport; or
      bail conditions, imposed by a police officer or a court in the United Kingdom, which include travel restrictions or restrictions on the possession of a valid United Kingdom passport;
      https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-issuing-withdrawal-or-refusal-of-passports

      It seems both the CPS and SYP have ignored the IPS and the Home Secretary.
      Is it any wonder Britain is seen as a ‘soft touch’ on crime when daft decisions like this go unchallenged?

      Like

      • Thanks Colin, at last we have some common sense information. If the CPS were involved in the decision not to have this man’s passport taken from him, then the police have no say in what happens, quite contrary to the views of the anti-establishment posters on this site like Dave of Dinnington and co. I know where Dave is coming from and it’s all about Orgreave and his attempt to cover up the rioting and violence committed by his fellow strikers at that location. We can only hope the IPCC use their loaf for once!

        Like

  10. Well there’s bad news and good news. First the bad news. I forgot the sub judice rule in suggesting we publish the testimony of his victims. The good news can be viewed by googling “trial in absentia” and “UK”. There’s an interesting PDF by a liberal QC bemoaning that trial in absentia in the UK has become easier since 2001 and was possible even before then if a defendant absconded. It’s entitled “Trial in Absentia: England and Wales”. So at least those accusing him can have their day in court if the authorities are willing.

    Like

  11. Anonymous 10.59. Going off subject here, but do enlighten us: just how many miners involved in Orgreave were convicted of riot?

    Like

    • Not enough but, the film and photographic evidence says it all! If you wish to wear blinkers and turn a blind eye, it’s up to you.

      Like

      • Leaving aside the miner’s strike and returning to topic nothing in Colin’s information contradicts the statement “the force decided it would not be proportionate to request he surrender his passport”. Oh and if its anti establishment to criticise a force two of whose senior officers threatened to hand over a Home Office researcher to the rape gangs and 44 of whom are under investigation for complicity in gang rape of little girls then you can call me Che Guevara.

        Like

    • Well Basharat still is above, or at any rate beyond the law thanks to SYP. Arshid will be also very soon we may expect. Is this gross incompetence or something more sinister?

      Like

      • It’s surely got to be the latter, this is a deeply suspect decision to put it mildly

        Thames Valley Police have been doing pretty well in terms of anti-grooming operations over the vast 2 or 3 years with several trials and further arrests and charges

        These weren’t given bail

        “Qasim Hussain, Naim Khan, Allah Ditta Yousaf and Owais Khan were all remanded in custody this morning after being refused bail.”

        http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/13313331.Four_men_in_court_following_Oxford_child_sexual_exploitation_raids/?ref=twtrec

        There can’t be any difference; bail refusal must have been based on the possibility of flight and or witness intimidation.

        Extremely strong in these cases

        Like

        • I have reluctantly concluded you are right about the sinister interpretation. There is a very interesting order of events. Basharat Hussain bailed, Banaras Hussain denied bail due to Basharat’s flight, Arshid Hussain granted bail despite Basharat’s flight. It seems random until you consider that Banaras was denied bail by a court and the other two seem (?) to have both been bailed by the police. Then put this with the disappearance of so much evidence, Jason Harwin’s 2012 claim that the true victim total was in low double figures and the relationship of the suspects with Akhtar.
          The minimum one could say is that we have a case of sackable incompetence.

          Like

  12. Having read carefully all the that as been posted I believe that the ones who have run will have all the blame on their head by other party’s and persons responsible.

    Like

  13. Talking of passports. Does anyone know if he has dual citizenship and therefore also a Pakistani passport? If he has then his British citizenship can be revoked. Incidentally, revoking his British passport would be a serious impediment to travel. UK passports allow visa-free travel to 173 countries while those issued by Pakistan only 32.

    Like

    • If he doesn’t have dual citizenship then he has no residency right and could be expelled as an illegal alien, notwithstanding the absence of an extradition treaty.

      Like

  14. Pingback: Police ‘pursuing’ Rotherham grooming suspect who fled to Pakistan | Rotherham Politics

  15. Pingback: Rotherham child sexual exploitation suspect faces further charges | Rotherham Politics

Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.