SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing, Judge Gillian Wade KC said:

"Mohammed Akram you were convicted after trial of 9 charges involving serious sexual and physical abuse of three women.  Two of your victims had been in long term relationships with you. All of the women were vulnerable in their own particular ways. The charges relating to them involved multiple rapes and assaults over a number of years. The assaults involved the use of weapons such as a knife, a hammer, a spanner, bottles and other objects used to harm and intimidate them. The sexual assaults and rapes took place against a background of violence and fear. The assaults resulted in injury. One woman was pregnant at the time you assaulted her and another sustained injuries which were so serious they resulted in her being permanently disfigured. You were also convicted of attempting to murder her.

In addition to these offences you were convicted of a single incident of rape of the third woman, who was exceptionally vulnerable.  Fortunately her evidence had been captured earlier at a commission as she sadly passed away during the course of the trial and was never aware of the verdict.  

I have also had the benefit of, and taken fully into account the Victim Impact Statement provided by one of the women, which makes clear the profound effect your offending has had upon her.

The offences of which you were convicted spanned a range of dates from January 1995 to the end of March 2022, a period in excess of 26 years.  In 2003 you received a 7 year extended sentence for the rape of another young girl, from whom the jury also heard evidence. It is troubling that some of the offending on this indictment post-dates your release from that sentence. Your record is extensive and although the Crown did not initially seek a risk assessment report, the nature and extent of your convictions oblige me to consider whether the risk criteria, supportive of an order for lifelong restriction are met.

I now have the benefit of a very full risk assessment report with which you offered minimal cooperation. However the author of the report is clear that the effect which your lack of engagement has had on his assessment of risk is mitigated by the numerous other sources of information to which he had access.  He concludes that despite your advancing years and the fact that you have  served lengthy sentences for convictions at High Court level and undergone long periods of post release supervision  there has been no impact on your propensity to continue to offend and present a risk to the public whenever an opportunity  arises.  He has therefore assessed you as presenting an unequivocal high risk.

I have to determine if it is probable that the nature of, or the circumstances of the commission of, the offences of which you have been convicted either in themselves or as part of a pattern of behaviour are such as to demonstrate that there is a likelihood that you, if at liberty, will seriously endanger the lives, or physical or psychological well-being, of members of the public at large.

I have taken into account everything which has been said on your behalf and note that your position remains one of innocence which restricts anything your counsel can say about remorse, responsibility or insight into your offending.

I am therefore  satisfied that on the balance of probabilities the risk criteria specified in section 210E of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland ) Act 1995 are met and that it is necessary to impose upon  you an Order for Lifelong Restriction. That is a sentence of imprisonment for an indeterminate period.

I require to specify the minimum period you must serve in custody before the Parole Board for Scotland can, in the future, consider your case. That is called the punishment part of the sentence and Parliament has set out how I must go about fixing that.

Had I not been minded to make an order for lifelong restriction, I would have imposed a sentence of 8 years on charge 5 and a sentence of 6 years in relation to charge 6 to run concurrently with one another , those offences having occurred within broadly the same time frame . I would also have imposed a concurrent period of imprisonment of 2 years in respect of charge 1 bringing the total period imposed in relation to offending against the first complainer to 8 years.

In relation to charge 7 I would have imposed a consecutive sentence of 6 years imprisonment and in respect of the assaults, sexual assaults and attempted murder of the third complainer libelled in charges 8, 10, 11 and 13 I would have imposed a further cumulo sentence of 8 years bringing the overall total of any determinate sentence to 22 years.

Because I am instead imposing an order for lifelong restriction I must ignore any period of imprisonment which may be necessary for the protection of the public. Having done so I consider that the appropriate period to satisfy requirements of punishment and deterrence is 10 years.

I will follow the normal approach suggested in the legislation and reduce that period by one half to take account of the effects of early release. The result, is that the punishment part for the purposes of the order for lifelong restriction is 5 years – one half of the 10 year term.

I make it clear that this is no more than a minimum period. The sentence imposed is not a sentence of imprisonment for 5 years, it is an Order for Lifelong Restriction which is a sentence of imprisonment for an indeterminate period. It shares some characteristics with a life sentence.

You will not be eligible to apply for parole until the punishment part has run its course. It certainly does not signify that you are likely to be released at that stage or indeed ever. That, as I have said, will be for others to decide.

Your sentences will be backdated to 7^th July 2022 when you were first remanded  in connection with the present offences.

You will remain subject to the notification requirements applicable to sex offenders for the remainder of your life. Your name has been added to the list of persons deemed unsuitable to work with vulnerable groups.”