SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing, Lord Harrower told Mohamed:

“Issa Mohamed, on 3 December 2024, at Edinburgh High Court, you tendered a plea of guilty under section 76 procedure to an indictment libelling one charge of assault and robbery, another charge of assault with intent to rob, and two charges of having in your possession on each of these occasions an imitation firearm with intent to cause fear of violence, contrary to section 16A of the Firearms Act 1968. 

On two separate dates in February 2024, first in Glasgow, then in Edinburgh, you arranged to meet with lone women in their own homes, where they had been offering to supply massage services.  Once there you pulled out an airsoft gun, modelled on a Colt self-loading pistol, and to which you had applied black tape to cover up the original blue colour of the slide.  In each case, you presented this imitation firearm at the woman, demanding money from her.  In the first incident, you made off with £200.  In the second, after you had grabbed her by the wrists, the woman defended herself with some kind of spray, and you left with nothing.  

You are originally from Libya, but were granted asylum and leave to remain in this country for an initial period of five years, expiring on 6 November 2024.  I am grateful to the social worker for having provided such a detailed and careful report into your background.  You told her that you committed these offences in order to raise money.  You say human traffickers abducted your brother in Libya and threatened to kill him unless you paid them a substantial ransom.   Having been given six months to come up with the money, the ultimatum was due to expire at the end of February 2024.  In the first few months of that six-month period you claim to have sent them £11,000, but since this was still only a small fraction of the sum demanded, you became desperate.

Having checked her departmental records, the social worker discovered that you had previously spoken to the police about your brother’s captors demanding money from you.  At that stage you were unable to offer any documentary proof of your claims, but the police encouraged you to log any future telephone calls, to record conversations, and to provide evidence of any bank transfers.  Since this interview took place in March 2023, it must have occurred several months before the six-month ultimatum you claim to have received.  It also occurred before the alleged transfer of £11,000.  While I am prepared to accept that you may have been subject to a degree of coercion falling short of duress, in the absence of any independent evidence to support the details of your account, I am not able to give it as much weight as I might otherwise have done. 

I have taken account of everything said on your behalf by Mr Cloggie.  You are now aged 30 and have no previous convictions.  You have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of events in Libya affecting yourself personally and also members of your family.  While there is no information before me to suggest that your health difficulties cannot be managed from within a custodial setting, I would accept that a prison sentence is likely to have a greater impact on you than it would have on someone not burdened by similar concerns. 

Set against these mitigating factors is the fact that you have committed two very serious assaults, each of which is aggravated by reason of your having targeted lone women in their own homes, with the intention of robbing them.  In each case, your threats were backed up with an imitation firearm, made by you to look more realistic.  While your victims will inevitably have been put in fear of their own safety, you appear to have struggled to recognise the impact of your offending on them.  In all the circumstances, a substantial prison sentence is necessary. 

This is a case in which two consecutive sentences would be justified in order to reflect the separate offences you have committed against each complainer.  In that event, I would have imposed a cumulo sentence of 4 years in respect of charges 1 and 3, and a further cumulo sentence of 4 years in respect of charges 2 and 4. However, in order that the total sentence should fairly and proportionately reflect the gravity of your offending as a whole, I have decided to impose a single cumulo sentence in respect of all the charges against you. 

Had it not been for the timing of your plea, I would have sentenced you to a period of imprisonment of 7 years.  Taking the timing of your plea into account, that sentence will be reduced to one of 56 months.  The sentence will be backdated to 21 February 2024 when you were first remanded in custody in respect of charge 2.  In doing so, I have taken no account of the period of about one week when you were at liberty, having been released on bail on 29 February, and then on 6 March remanded once again in respect of charge 1.”

16 January 2024