Mr Mohammed was convicted of two separate counts of indecent assault after matching descriptions given by complainants and being picked out of identification parades by two complainants (he had initially been suspected of more assaults, but those complainants made no positive identifications in the line ups and so he was not prosecuted in respect of those allegations). Mr Mohammed struggled to communicate effectively in English and suffered from a mental illness (Schizophrenia). He denied any involvement.
An application for leave to appeal on the basis that the identification evidence had not been strong enough for the judge to leave the case to the jury was refused.
The conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal after a referral from the CCRC based on DNA evidence found on a mobile phone that had been recovered from the scene of one assault. This DNA had been tested at the time and found not to match Mr Mohammed. The CCRC arranged for further testing and submitted a partial profile based on this testing to the National DNA database. They found that the profile was a good match for another man, referred to as S (who was Turkish). S had a history of similar offences, and also matched descriptions given by the victims better than Mr Mohammed (Mr Mohammed was described as having a black ethnic appearance, whereas the assailant was described as having dark olive skin). Messages found on the mobile phone found at the scene were also in Turkish.
< Back to Case Search < Back to Overview Graph
- Offence: Sexual offences
- Jurisdiction: England & Wales
- County: Greater London
- Ethnicity: Black
- Gender: M
- Offence convicted of: Indecent Assault
- Year of crime: 2001
- Year of initial conviction: 2004
- Affirmative evidence of innocence: Y
- CCRC Referral: Y
- Post Office Case: N
- Type of fresh evidence at appeal: DNA evidence
- Crown argued case at CofA: Y
- Retrial: N
- Previous appeals: Unsuccessful application for leave to appeal