He was caught on camera trying to cover up his crime.
Mohammed Taroos Khan seen at a shipping container in Bradford where he’d stored the body of his niece Somaiya overnight.
It’s here he’d transfer it to his car before driving to a location where he’d dump her.
The 20-year-old student described as vibrant and bright left beside rubbish.
Bradford, England, the 6th of July, 2022, 7:15 p.m.
Police officers with West Yorkshire police have been on the hunt for a high-risk missing person who hadn’t been seen since late June.
As the hours and days had ticked by, hope was fading that she would be found safe and well.
Investigators were combing through Fitzwilliam Street, which was located next to an area of wasteland where people would often illegally dispose of rubbish.
As officers continued their searches, they were told to look for any gaps in the wall that they could look through to see if anything stood out.
One officer was able to find a gap and peer through, and something quickly caught his eye.
A carpet was wrapped around an object that had been tied together with string.
It was surrounded by flies.
The string was noticeably clean and new.
As they approached, they were hit with a smell that law enforcement recognizes all too well.
It was the smell of death.
The carpet had boxes of rotten food and rubbish piled on top of it in an apparent attempt to conceal it.
Peeling back the carpet, they were met with a scene that many of us can scarcely begin to imagine.
It was the severely decomposed body of a woman who was completely unrecognizable.
Although they were yet to formally identify her, they felt sure that this was the woman they had been searching for.
Although the hunt for her had come to an end, the investigation into what had happened to her and why was just beginning.
Today’s case takes us to Bradford, England, home to 20-year-old Somaiya Begum.
Somaiya was a bright, hardworking young woman who was a biomedical science student at Leeds Beckett University.
She also worked part-time as a carer for the elderly and disabled.
It was a job she loved.
She posted to social media saying, “I was not sure what path to take as I have no prior experience in care, but since joining, I’m having the time of my life.
The management is so supportive and encouraging.
Overall, I’m ecstatic to be a part of this team.
” Somaiya was someone who kept to herself and was described by neighbors as being quiet, but she excelled at university.
>> >> She passed her first year with excellent marks and displayed a fantastic set of academic skills and a great dedication to her studies.
Finally, after years of turmoil, things appeared to be on the up for her.
Somaiya was from a large but very fractured family that had been torn apart by a feud that had been going on for years.
At the age of 16, Somaiya had gone to the police.
She had been promised to someone in marriage by her parents.
It was someone she didn’t want to marry, one of her cousins in Pakistan.
Her father, Yaseen, had threatened her with violence if she didn’t agree to it, so she made the immensely brave decision to go to the authorities.
A forced marriage protection order was taken out on the 7th of September, 2020.
This applied to her and her siblings.
A forced marriage protection order can stop someone from being forced to enter into a marriage or from being taken out of the country.
It can also help return someone to the United Kingdom if they have been taken abroad.
Following this, all of the children were removed from the home.
She then moved into a house on Binney Street with her paternal grandmother and her uncle, Dawud Khan.
Moving out and living at 32 Binney Street gave Somaiya the freedom and independence she wanted now that she was away from Yaseen.
She could eat what she wanted, dress in the clothes that she liked, see her friends as she pleased, and watch what she wanted on television.
One of her relatives would later say that she had actually been homeschooled for several years and forbidden from going to university.
Living here meant she was also free to continue her education.
The 25th of June, 2022.
Somaiya had been on a late shift at work and was captured on CCTV walking home at 4 minutes past midnight.
As morning came, it was a normal day in Bradford.
At 3:35 p.m., Somaiya sent a message to one of her closest friends.
The friend later replied at 4:40 p.m., sending Somaiya a video of rain out of the window.
She sent the message on WhatsApp, but it didn’t deliver.
Her friend didn’t think too much of it, believing that maybe Somaiya’s phone battery had died.
But her friend grew more concerned as time went on and sent another message to Somaiya saying, “Can you text me when you get this, please?” But she still heard nothing.
The following day, she contacted Somaiya’s family to see if they had heard from her, and she was told that a missing person’s report had already been filed.
When Somaiya’s uncle, Dawud, had got back to the house on the day Somaiya had last been seen, he said the front door was unlocked, which was very unusual.
Upon entering the property, he found Somaiya’s uncle and his brother, Mohammed Taroos Khan, in the house at 6:30 p.
m.
He asked him what he was doing there as Mohammed was not actually allowed to be at the house as he was abusive and violent.
Mohammed had a long criminal record and several convictions.
He had been convicted on June 23rd, 2016 of battery against his own daughter after he had used a knife to threaten her, saying he would chop her up as he had found out that she had been contacting boys.
A restraining order had also been taken out in 2016 to prevent Mohammed from having any contact with his mother or going to her house, 32 Binney Street.
The hours ticked by, but there was nothing from Somaiya.
This was very unusual for her.
Whenever she went out, she would always be sure to tell Dawud and her grandmother where she was going and for how long she would be gone.
Dawud began calling her and left her a message, as did her aunt, but there was still no response from her.
As the panic really started to set in, Dawud again tried contacting his niece.
At 11 minutes past midnight, her aunt also called her again, but still could not get a response.
The calls to Somaiya’s phone carried on throughout the morning and afternoon.
At 1:15 p.
m.
, Dawud reported her as missing to the police.
West Yorkshire police attempted to make contact with her and called her phone several times, but just like everyone else, they too got no response and their calls went straight to voicemail.
They also attempted to contact her uncle, Mohammed, who had been at the house that day, but he too was not responding.
Also that day, officers were out on patrol, and at 5:44 p.
m.
, the message came through that there was a high-risk missing person that they needed to begin looking for.
They were asked to go to a shipping container at 1A Car to Gate Works where 53-year-old Mohammed had lived since November 2021.
As they arrived at his address, he was hanging his washing out and waved at them as they drove past.
The unit he lived in was small and compact, 30 ft long and 9 ft wide with another unit stacked on top of it.
Parked outside was his Mitsubishi Spacewagon.
The officers asked him why he had failed to respond to numerous calls the police had made to him.
He said he had just been busy.
He also said that he had been to Binney Street the day before to give his mother some fruit, arriving at the house at around 2:00 p.
m.
The door was locked, so he had called Somaiya to get her to unlock and open the door for him.
He said that Somaiya was not in the living room when he left and that he didn’t see her.
As the search for Somaiya continued, the police began tracing the movements of her uncle, Mohammed, and after trawling through the surveillance footage, Mohammed was seen on CCTV at 1:52 p.
m.
arriving on Binney Street on the 25th of June.
One of the officers from West Yorkshire police was tasked with listening to the audio from the CCTV cameras on Binney Street.
The officer was able to hear a male voice saying, “Get the [ __ ] out of my face.
” And then, “I’m coming back.
” Footsteps and running could be heard before the man said, “Come back.
Come here.
” The female voice could then be heard saying, “Lock the door.
” This wasn’t the only concerning evidence they had found.
They had observed Mohammed’s car later driving around.
He had parked on Mill Lane and removed what appeared to be a large and heavy item from his car before dragging it away.
At 5:00 p.
m.
on the 27th of June, Mohammed Khan was arrested on suspicion of kidnap.
When the officers questioned him, he was quick to say that he had a bad memory, but in spite of the severity of the allegation against him, he appeared to be very relaxed.
He said that his relationship with his niece was generally good.
As the officers continued to talk to him, at 7:30 p.
m.
that day, other officers went to 32 Binney Street to conduct a search and take photographs of the property.
Later that evening, they went to 1A Cartergate Works, where Muhammad lived, to take pictures, too.
The officers continued taking more photographs the following day, and they found a smoldering bin by the side of his unit.
It contained a partially burnt mobile phone, which was taken away to be examined and analyzed.
It was later found to be Sumaiya’s.
Muhammad was interviewed again on the 28th of June at 14 minutes past midnight at Trafalgar House Police Station.
He was asked again about Sumaiya’s disappearance, but he provided no answers.
The officers asked him if he really wanted to help find his niece.
His response, “I’ve given my statement, and there’s no further comment.
” He was interviewed later again that day at 5:07 p.
m.
He reiterated he did not know where she was, and his lawyer told him he should make no further comments.
The officers asked him about going to Binny Street, despite the restraining order barring him from doing so.
He said he had a good reason for going there, but refused to elaborate any further, and answered no comment to all remaining questions.
The magistrate granted the police a further 36 hours to question him, but they would later release him under investigation.
On the 1st of July, investigators were back at Binny Street, and it was then that they found something that caught their eye.
On a red metal table and the underside of the carpet in the living room, they found bloodstains.
They were swabbed and sent away to be analyzed.
They later came back as a match to Sumaiya.
The officers continued to look at Muhammad and his movements on the day she had last been seen.
On the 25th of June, he was captured on CCTV footage having a key cut for the house on Binny Street, giving him the ability to let himself in.
Again, this was a property that the restraining order stopped him from visiting.
At 3:49 that day, he was back at Binny Street.
CCTV recorded the raised voices of a man and a woman.
It was also around this time that there was no more activity on Sumaiya’s phone.
Phone data showed that he had made internet searches to look for big rubble sacks.
CCTV footage from the shipping container where he lived showed him reversing his Mitsubishi Space Wagon towards the container and locking it.
The angle of the door blocked whatever it was he was doing from the view of the camera, but he was also wearing gloves.
11 days after she was reported missing, the discovery that people had been dreading was made.
Sumaiya’s body was found tied up in a carpet and dumped on waste ground, left to decompose in the summer heat.
A postmortem was carried out.
It was discovered that a 4-in metal spike was lodged in her back.
Her lung had been punctured as a result.
The pathologist said that this was not, in and of itself, an immediate life-threatening injury if one were to seek medical assistance, but if someone failed to seek medical attention, it could be fatal, mainly due to the risk of infection.
The pathologist said she was satisfied that there was evidence of trauma, including potential assault prior to death, and that there was nothing evident in the postmortem examination that suggested natural disease or natural illness.
The Home Office pathologist was not able to determine exactly what Sumaiya’s cause of death was due to the level of decomposition, especially around her head and neck, but the police said she had been subjected to a vicious and sustained attack.
The news was devastating, and many people were affected.
The head of her course at Leeds Beckett University paid tribute to her, saying she was a dedicated student who was well-liked by her peers and tutors.
On the 6th of July at 9:10 p.
m.
, officers arrived at Muhammad’s address, and he was re-arrested, this time on suspicion of murder.
It was now his sixth time being interviewed by the police, beginning at 4:41 p.
m.
on the 7th of July.
He was told that the previous day the police had found the badly decomposing body of a woman, and although they were yet to identify her, they strongly believed it was Sumaiya they had found.
He said he had no clue what they were talking about, and when asked if he was the one responsible for her death, he replied, “Definitely not.
” He was asked about his movements on the day she had last been seen, and said he had just been driving around with nowhere to go in mind, as he simply enjoyed driving.
The officers asked if he had been driving around to try and find a place to dispose of Sumaiya’s body.
This was something he denied.
Why had he parked so close to where her body would ultimately be found? He said it was a free country, and he could park there if he wanted to, saying it bore no relevance that she would later be discovered there.
Why had her phone also been found burning in a bin next to his unit? “That could just be a coincidence,” he said.
He said he was really upset at the thought of a family member being treated in this way, explaining that he wasn’t violent, and he believed most people would describe him as a fantastic person.
They questioned him as to why he had had a key cut to the property, and he told them it was because his mother had just had a heart attack, and it was not so he could go back to the house to remove Sumaiya’s body.
His seventh and final interview was conducted at 1:04 p.
m.
on the 8th of July.
The officers played him the CCTV footage, and once again, he had no comment to make.
He was asked about the CCTV footage that showed him removing something heavy from his car.
He said it was just rubbish.
“All I know is this is a rubbish tip, so I thought it would be a good place to tip some rubbish,” he said.
He was quizzed about the metal spike that had been found lodged in Sumaiya’s body, but he said he didn’t know what it was.
He told the police he thought they were obsessed with trying to put the blame on somebody to make it look like they had been doing their job, adding that he felt he was being forced to take the blame for something that he hadn’t done.
His protestations of innocence made no difference.
He was charged with murder and remanded in custody.
He would later appear in Crown Court on September the 20th via a video link from HMP Leeds to enter his plea.
When asked what his plea was, he replied, “Not guilty, Mom.
” He denied the charge of murder, but he did admit to perverting the course of justice and disposing of her body, as well as trying to destroy her phone.
At Bradford Crown Court, Muhammad Taroos Khan went on trial with Mr.
Justice Garnham presiding.
Prosecutor Jason Peters said Sumaiya had met a traumatic death following a violent attack at her home.
He said that her body was dumped and left to rot and decompose on wasteland like rubbish, such that she was not recognizable.
His previous statements that he knew nothing about her death would later change in court.
Muhammad’s lawyer said that his client had been summoned to Binny Street to dispose of her body, adding he knew nothing about the death until after Sumaiya had been killed.
Muhammad did not give evidence during the trial, and the prosecution said, >> >> “We say the proper inference to that is because he simply cannot answer because he is guilty.
” In terms of what Muhammad’s motive could have been, it was put forward that this was a so-called honor-based killing, rooted in the fact that Sumaiya had allegedly brought shame upon the family by refusing the marriage in Pakistan.
Muhammad’s lawyer said that his client would have no motive to kill Sumaiya, and said that his brother, Sumaiya’s father Yasin, would have a motive.
Sumaiya’s aunt said that Yasin had been humiliated and incandescent with rage after Sumaiya had reported him to the police over the forced marriage.
But Yasin would not be there for the trial to hear any of this, as on the 8th of January, he had gone to Pakistan on a one-way ticket after entering into an Islamic divorce with his wife.
Muhammad’s lawyer said, “Yasin was completely controlling and cruel to his daughter Sumaiya.
Her life must have been a living hell, a hell that was created by her father.
” But the prosecution were fighting back, arguing that Muhammad was not only responsible for disposing of her body, which he now admitted to, they were putting forward their evidence that he had killed her.
The CCTV footage, the raised voices on set footage, him having the key cut, and the last communication on her phone, the prosecution said, “Whilst the prosecution cannot say precisely when Sumaiya was killed, you can conclude that something significant had happened around or shortly after that point, because there was no apparent further communication between Sumaiya and anyone else after that time.
This coincided with her uncle arriving at the house.
” A detective constable would also testify he had been in an interview room with Muhammad on the 29th of June.
He said that Muhammad “asked me what the sentence for someone in his position was.
I explained murder could carry a life sentence.
” He went on to ask what the sentence was for the lesser offense of manslaughter.
Again, I explained that that would be determined by a judge with the facts of the case taken into account.
He asked if it was true you only serve half your sentence in prison.
I said that would depend on the judge.
The prosecutor said, “These are sophisticated questions for someone who is innocent.
They are not questions of an innocent man.
They are questions knowing what he had done.
” With all of the evidence put before them following the 10-day trial, the jury deliberated for 9 and 1/2 hours over the course of 3 days.
They then reached their verdict.
The argument that Mohammed had just disposed of her body and not been responsible for her murder was rejected by the jury.
Mohammed Taroos Khan was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison with the minimum term of 25 years for the murder of his niece.
He was also sentenced to 5 years in prison for perverting the course of justice, which he is to serve concurrently.
Cries could be heard from the public gallery as the verdict was read out.
He was caught on camera trying to cover up his crime.
Mohammed Taroos Khan seen at a shipping container in Bradford where he’d stored the body of his niece Sumaiya overnight.
It’s here he’d transfer it to his car before driving to a location where he’d dump her.
The 20-year-old student, described as vibrant and bright, left beside rubbish.
Mr.
Justice Garnham said, “It is not possible to identify a motive for this dreadful attack by you.
It is pure speculation to consider whether this murder was part of some appalling family agreement.
All that matters for present purposes is that the jury have found you guilty of the heinous crime of murder.
” When considering the aggravating factors in the case, the judge referred to the unlawful disrespectful disposal of Sumaiya’s body as one of the most serious aspects, saying, “You showed absolutely no respect for the dead body of your niece.
” When Mohammed was sentenced, the judge told him he was going to be an old man by the time he could apply for parole.
Mohammed Taroos Khan will be 78 years old when he can apply for parole.
For the officers who had investigated, this finally brought some closure to this appalling case.
The senior investigating officer, Detective Superintendent Mark Bowes, said, “Her life was cut short by the actions of her uncle, Mohammed Taroos Khan, who took her life in a vicious and sustained attack at her home address, the place she should have felt safe.
” Khan’s been jailed for life with a minimum term of 25 years for the brutal murder in June last year.
It came after Sumaiya rejected a forced marriage set up by her father and reported him to police.
A court order meant she was staying with her grandmother, the address she vanished from.
Days later, she was found dead in wasteland wrapped in a carpet with a 4-in metal spike in her back.
The judge today said he rejected the idea he should treat this as a so-called honor killing.
A charity which helps victims of this type of violence says it’s disappointed in the sentence handed down.
Ultimately, it can be a motive that can increase the risk to people.
So, in terms of the sentencing, we’re disappointed to see that that hasn’t been reflected given that there was a forced marriage.
But with that said, I think it’s really important for statutory agencies that are involved and that were involved in Sumaiya’s life before she was murdered that they get that so they can make sure that victims get the right response.
Sumaiya had been brave to stand up to threats of violence before.
Sadly, this time her life was cruelly cut short by a family member meant to protect her.
Fatima Patel, a family friend, spoke on behalf of Sumaiya’s family outside court.
She said, “Their emotions are still all over the place.
They’re still grieving that there is some kind of closure for them.
All they want to do now is live on in Sumaiya’s memories and unfortunately continue in the grieving process.
” Following Mohammed’s sentence, it was announced that a challenge to it had been made.
It was argued that it was unduly lenient and should be increased.
This appeal went to the Attorney General who disagreed and said the sentence was not unduly lenient and therefore it would not go before the Court of Appeal and the original sentence would stand.
The outpouring of anger and shock following the murder of Sumaiya Begum was huge.
Neighbors and local residents have been leaving flowers outside of the property and the local councilor said that the community had been deeply affected by what had happened.
Neighbors on Binnie Street said that Dawood had been left so traumatized by what had happened to his niece, he was unable to go back to the property following her death.
Sumaiya Begum was 20 years old and had her whole life in front of her.
She had shown tremendous courage and bravery in going to the authorities and had only just found the independence and freedom that she had fought so hard for.
Africa Seen, the CEO and founder of Savera UK, another charity working to end so-called honor-based abuse and violence, explained so eloquently why in the wake of Sumaiya’s death this vital work must continue.
The details of Sumaiya’s death are harrowing.
Sumaiya was a bright, brave woman who had the right to live freely without fear.
Today, we remember her as the smart, courageous student she was while renewing our pledge to end honor-based abuse and harmful practices.
We must be clear that honor-based abuse and harmful practices are not a part of culture or any religion but violations of human rights.
Culture is something beautiful to be celebrated and is not an excuse for abuse.
Our thoughts go out to those affected by Sumaiya’s death, including her courageous family members who gave evidence during the trial.
In her memory and in the memory of everyone lost to honor-based abuse, we will continue vital work to safeguard and advocate for those at risk and campaign to end honor-based abuse and harmful practices for good.
