SENTENCING STATEMENTS

On sentencing, Lord Harrower said:

"Sunil Theyath, at a preliminary hearing at Glasgow High Court, you tendered a plea of guilty to a charge of directing others, and of directing others to direct others, to commit an offence aggravated by a connection with serious organised crime, contrary to sections 30(1)(b) and 30(2) of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010.  Umar Mohammed and Hafeeza Samreen, at the same hearing, you each pled guilty to a charge of being involved in serious organised crime, contrary to section 28(1) of the same statute.

This was a particularly nasty case of courier fraud, in which an 86-year old widow was persuaded to part with her life savings to the value of almost £2 million.  She was contacted by a man calling himself Garry Reid, who pretended to work for the Financial Services Authority.  He advised the complainer that her investments were unsafe and required to be converted into gold bullion bars.  These would be collected from the complainer by couriers, and taken to a secure vault, where they would be stored pending an investigation.  The complainer was advised that, for security reasons, she should avoid discussing this with anyone, including close family members.  She was told that even the couriers would not know what they were collecting.  This was therefore a sophisticated operation involving significant planning.  Between May and August 2023, you worked together with others to arrange the collection of the bullion bars from the complainer, and to transport them to various locations in London and elsewhere for onward travel. The value of the bullion was £1,919,411.91.  It has never been recovered.

Mr Theyath, you had a leading role.  You were closely associated with the man calling himself Garry Reid.  Having left the United Kingdom towards the end of June for Dubai, returning only in September via Hyderabad, you managed to direct the operation from abroad.  You were continually in contact, by telephone and by Whatsapp, with Mr Mohammed, and with other associates.  You sent Mr Mohammed instructions, including directions to the complainer’s house, as well as passwords, for Mr Mohammed’s wife, Ms Samreen, to give to the complainer in exchange for the bullion.  Mr Mohammed would report back to you, during and after each collection.  On at least three occasions, always at different locations, such as train stations and a Cash & Carry, Mr Mohammed and Ms Samreen handed the packages over to another of your close associates.  On at least one occasion, he then delivered the package to your home address in London.  I am satisfied that your culpability is high.

Mr Mohammed and Ms Samreen, although you worked under Mr Theyath’s direction, you each played a significant role. You were the couriers.  You travelled up to Scotland from East Sussex and East London.  On each of four separate occasions in July and August you collected anything between 11 and 33 bullion bars from the complainer.  Ms Samreen, you were chosen on the basis that, as a woman, you might more easily gain the complainer’s trust and confidence.  You alone had face-to-face contact with the complainer.  I say face-to-face, but in fact you were masked whenever you met her.  I do not underestimate your involvement. 

I am not aware of any case of courier fraud in which financial harm on anything like this scale has been caused to a single individual.  The loss of such an astonishingly large sum of money would be difficult for anyone to bear. But given the age and vulnerability of the complainer, which are hardly unusual in offences of this type, the impact has been devastating.  It has affected her ability to meet everyday living costs.  It will inevitably have impacted on her ability to make plans for herself, in the last years of her life, and to make provision for her family.  She now feels constantly worried and ashamed.  To date the complainer has managed to recover only a small fraction of her losses from the bank.  Any compensation she may receive does not diminish the financial harm you have caused.  It simply spreads it about. 

When the case first called before me, I asked for background reports to be prepared, and these are now available.

Mr Theyath, during the interview with the social worker, you attempted to minimise your involvement in a manner that is inconsistent with both the terms of the charge to which you have pled guilty and the agreed narrative.  The social worker acknowledges that you were struggling with financial difficulties, but concludes that you were motivated primarily by greed.  Although you expressed deep remorse, you were unable to articulate any real insight into the likely emotional impact of your offending on the victim. 

Mr Mohammed, during your interview you claimed to have believed you were involved in legitimate courier work. Ms Dow has explained that this was only your impression at the outset of the operation.  Certainly, by the time of the first uplift, after you had got lost and the complainer came to meet you, you became concerned that she might have noticed your car, something that would not obviously have troubled a legitimate courier.  You also accepted that it was your idea to recruit your wife, in order to put the complainer at ease and to seek to avoid suspicion. Any notion you may have had that this was legitimate courier work must have been fleeting. You, too, appear to have had financial difficulties, and saw this offence as an opportunity to make what you yourself called “easy money”. The social worker acknowledged your apparent remorse but was of the view that your appreciation of the likely impact on the victim was no more than superficial. 

Ms Samreen, your claim, reported by the social worker, that you didn’t mean to cause the complainer any harm, simply beggars belief.  Even if you did not know precisely what you were collecting, you knew that they were “high value” goods.  In your case, however, the social worker appears to be satisfied that you are now genuinely insightful regarding the harm you have caused.  I take that, and your personal circumstances, into account. 

Sunil Theyath, Umar Mohammed and Hafeeza Samreen, please stand.  None of you has any criminal record, so far as social services have been able to discover.  You are all highly educated individuals.  In other aspects of your lives, you have made positive contributions to society.  The extent to which you have each benefited financially remains unclear.  I also acknowledge that you have each been assessed as presenting with a low risk of re-offending, albeit, in your case, Ms Samreen, the social worker has carried out a re-assessment and placed you in the “medium” risk category.  Were it not for the mitigation put forward on your behalf, the sentences I am about to impose would have been significantly higher. 

Each of the following sentences have been discounted by one quarter to take account of the timing of your pleas.  They will be backdated to 18 December 2023 when you were remanded in custody. Mr Theyath, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of 63 months. Mr Mohammed, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of 45 months.  Ms Samreen, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of 30 months. 

In addition, Mr Theyath, I am satisfied that you have been convicted of a serious offence in Scotland within the meaning of section 2A(2) of the Serious Crime Act 2007, and that there are reasonable grounds to believe that making a serious crime prevention order would protect the public by preventing, restricting or disrupting your involvement in serious crime in Scotland.  Therefore, for a period of 5 years beginning with the date upon which you are released from prison, you will be subject to a serious crime prevention order the conditions of which are set out in the unopposed application by the Crown."