- Javaid’s 4 confiscated laptops coronary heart of case in opposition to police.
- Laptops maintain proof supporting his rightful possession of cash.
- He alleges his seized units have been “tampered” by London police.
LONDON: Former cash alternate bureau boss British Pakistani, Ahsan Javaid has sued Scotland Yard to get well practically £600,000 confiscated by the police after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) didn’t show it’s £34 million cash laundering case in opposition to him, resulting in conclusion of the high-profile trial and the acquittal.
On the coronary heart of Javaid’s case in opposition to the London police are his 4 laptops, which the Scotland Yard officers seized throughout the raids in November 2017 and returned after practically 4 years.
Javaid alleges his laptops have been manipulated, tampered with, passwords modified and key proof to help his rightful possession of the seized money was destroyed, following his acquittal within the legal case.
Javaid, his spouse Amna Gulzar and two others have been first arrested in November 2017 however charged in Could 2018 with conspiring to launder £34 million between 2012 and 2018, primarily to Pakistan, with false identities by setting sham firms and accounts.
They have been accused of stashing away money in 43 financial institution accounts earlier than transferring the cash from the UK to Pakistan and different nations however the trial concluded amid failures by the police and the prosecution.
Nonetheless the police didn’t return the seized money of Javaid — estimated at £600,000 — on the time of his acquittal in October 2021. Now the British Pakistani has taken the police to the court docket over discrimination, unfairness and wrongful acts.
The trial concluded in October 2021 on the Snaresbrook Crown Court docket as a result of “systemic and catastrophic” disclosure failings by the prosecution, ill-preparedness and the shortage of proof.
Decide Charles Falk stopped the trial and condemned the CPS after the prosecution physique requested for extra time to research and put together proof — practically two months into the trial scheduled.
“Catastrophic failure has come about as a result of the investigation exponentially grew in dimension with out adequate manpower, assets, coaching or experience being allotted to it”, the decide had mentioned.
Javaid and his household celebrated the tip of trial and failure of the prosecution to get a legal conviction in opposition to them however his dilemma didn’t finish there because the police advised him that his cash will stay frozen and forfeited by the police as a recoverable cash beneath the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA), which supplies the police energy to grab monies with out formal fees, on floor of suspicions that the seized quantity is a recoverable property or supposed to be used in illegal conduct.
Javaid advised Geo Information in an interview he and his household have been put by way of a daunting nightmare for a number of years. He mentioned he has little doubt that he was handled like this due to his Pakistani origin and anybody else in the identical scenario would get a special therapy from the UK police and the prosecution.
He shared: “The monies we despatched to Pakistan have been remittance transfers. There was no cash laundering or criminality of any sort. We despatched cash from poor and working-class folks from the UK to Pakistan. Our firms have been registered with the Monetary Conduct Authority (FCA).”
“The police charged us in Could 2018 accusing us of cash laundering. We mentioned from day one which we weren’t concerned in any sort of cash laundering however no one believed us however after practically 4 years we have been confirmed proper and harmless because the prosecution didn’t show something in opposition to us,” he added.
“The prosecution mentioned they have been absolutely ready with proof and tried to place us beneath strain to plead responsible however we refused as we weren’t responsible. The trial began on the prosecution’s request after which the prosecution advised the court docket it was not ready,” Javaid additional said.
“It was established within the court docket that the cash was despatched to Pakistan by way of banking means and the whole lot was documented and declared,” he revealed.
Javaid mentioned the prosecution failed within the court docket as a result of it couldn’t show something in opposition to him and others since there have been no proofs and the CPS was looking for and invent the proof when there was none.
“Almost two months into the dwell trial, it was clear the CPS was clueless and fishing; it needed to stretch the case to by some means safe extra time and get some proof however the decide may see the CPS has no case and determined that the CPS can’t be given extra time and, subsequently, ended the trial,” Javaid said.
He additionally mentioned that the police returned laptops to him practically 4 years after the trial had ended however “the passwords have been modified or they manipulated all of the machines” as a result of the laptop computer is just not working now.
He confused: “The police withheld proof that was able to supporting my case, interfered with my potential to supply related proof and prevented me from accessing my laptops, which contained proof of the legitimacy of the buying and selling actions of the businesses.
“We imagine the police modified the passwords and manipulated the deviance. We can’t get the proof out of these laptops. We at the moment are asking the court docket to order a forensic inspection of our laptops to find out what the police did to the machines.”
“I’m preventing for justice and asking the court docket to carry the police accountable on the matter of taking part in with the laptops and the proof.” Javaid added.
Javaid complained that he was a sufferer of the police. “I and my household suffered so much all through. When the case began, I used to be on a Pakistani passport and was placed on the flight threat. I remained within the police custody for over 27 months with out committing any crime.
“The police tried to complicate issues as a lot because it may however ultimately the reality prevailed and we received. I’m certain we’ll win the civil proceedings case too. My case is in opposition to the police’s POCA powers.”
Javaid said that, “On this regulation the burden is on the accused and the accused has to show the whole lot. Additionally it is necessary that the police return the seized gadgets within the authentic and genuine type. These laptops carry essential proof. We’re requesting the court docket that these laptops have all types of information and that is our real cash which we’d like and must be returned to us.”
A CPS spokesperson advised Geo Information: “There was a failure to observe affordable traces of enquiry to make sure a good trial. We utilized to adjourn the case and treatment this however the Decide dominated the size of that job was too nice. We respect that call.
“The CPS stays dedicated to working with investigators at an early stage, creating proportionate and well timed instances whereas guaranteeing a good trial for all defendants.”
The Metropolitan Police mentioned: “Following the conclusion of legal proceedings, the Met made 9 functions for money forfeiture and the forfeiture of sums topic to account freezing orders beneath the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
“In January 2023, at Stratford Magistrates Court docket, a district decide ordered forfeiture in stuffed with the detained money and frozen funds. We’re conscious these forfeiture orders at the moment are topic to attraction and as such, we’re unable to remark any additional at the moment.”
The police denied manipulating the laptops saying that, “A difficulty was raised in regards to the return of laptops seized throughout the legal investigation. We dispute any allegations that the passwords to those laptops have been modified or the laptops unlawfully tampered with in any approach.”
It’s properly established that an acquittal in legal proceedings is just not a bar to money forfeiture proceedings. A distinct customary of proof applies, which means they relate to the cash and require no proof of guilt of any explicit particular person.
The end result of the legal proceedings had no bearing on the forfeiture functions and the acquittal itself didn’t type a foundation for questioning the credibility or reliability of any of the police proof.