Taxi Driver Online

Taxi driver in licence battle

A PRESTWICH taxi driver wrongly convicted for a crime he did not commit is still trying to get his job back three years after his release.

However, Mr Hasham Shah, who has eight children with his wife Alison, faces a bleak start to 2007 with no livelihood and no income to pay his mounting bills.

Mr Shah, who lives off Church Lane with his family, is struggling to get back his hackney carriage licence from Manchester City Council, where he has worked successfully as a black cab driver for 16 years.

In 2001, Mr Shah (42) was wrongly convicted of a criminal offence and had to serve nine months of an 18-month sentence before the alleged victim admitted to police that he had lied about Mr Shah's actions.

Eventually in 2003, Mr Shah's convictions were quashed by the Court of Appeal but by this time he had had his taxi licence revoked by the council.
He has been trying ever since to get the licence back so he can return to work but the council will not issue the licence until Mr Shah has passed the relevant tests.

Recently, Mr Shah discovered he had dyslexia which is a possible explanation why he has so far failed six of the seven tests he has taken.
His solicitor Aubrey Isaacson believes the council is for some reason restricting Mr Shah's application and that his case should be looked on with leniency for his lengthy service prior to going to prison.

Mr Isaacson said: "Mr Shah has been a competent black cab driver for 16 years without any complaints or blemishes on his record so I don't see how he could magically lose that ability, simply because he was off the road through no fault of his own for two and a half years.

"He was falsely convicted and I think they could exercise discretion. He even remembers driving the chief executive of the council, Sir Howard Bernstein, every night from Manchester to Sunnybank, so if Mr Bernstein himself was satisfied that Mr Shah was fit to drive then surely the licensing department can admit there isn't a problem in getting him back on the road."

Mr Shah's last test was taken on December 13 and he is still awaiting the result, despite beingpromised he would be informed before Christmas.
A meeting set for December 21 with licencing manager John Pullen was cancelled at the last minute by the town hall due to Mr Pullen's illness.

Mr Shah's wife Alison (42) said: "We have waited three years for a meeting but all they have ever done is cancel appointments. It shouldn't be like this. It is all totally unecessary. It would have been ideal for Hasham to get back to work for Christmas as he hasn't worked since August. We don't get any benefits and we face losing our home if he doesn't get back to work soon."

Mrs Shah said the family had gone through immense difficulties since her husband's trial. However, since his release, they have worked hard to rebuild their lives and owned a newsagent's in Bury New Road for five years until the long hours took their toll on the couple.

She said: "The flexibility that taxi driving gives a family as large as ours is ideal. When Hasham went to prison I became a single parent overnight. Before that we had never been apart in 16 years. It was like being told he was dead. Now, all we want is for him to get back to work."

Mr Isaacson labelled the council as "Scrooges" and said if Mr Shah didn't receive his licence soon he would appeal to the magistrates court.

A Manchester City Council spokesman said: "We are extremely sympathetic to Mr Shah for the miscarriage of justice he suffered. We understand that he is keen to get back to work and are working with him to achieve this as soon as possible.

"However, as the licensing authority, our primary consideration must be to ensure that before anyone is licensed to drive a taxi they pass the required tests and checks to ensure that the public are provided with a safe and high quality service. This includes testing that applicants have adequate knowledge of the city's routes, public buildings and attractions to enable them to get passengers to their destination by the most direct route.

"All taxi drivers are subject to these tests and checks and must satisfy them before driving members of the public in our city."

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Sounds like the intro to the A team

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

What a sad tale, the mush has done nothing wrong and loses his license.

What I would have done, rightly or wrongly, is to give him a knowledge test which he would have passed no matter what.

_________________
IDFIMH

So wheres the local Ass hiding, of course had been a member of the GMB who knows??????????????????????????????
Bang on SUSSEX theres more than one way of skinning a cat.
GRANDFATHER RIGHTS?????????????????????????

_________________
The views expressed by this contributor do not neccesarily reflect the policys of The GMB Nationally or of the GMB London Region.

Here is a news report of the quashing of the sentence.

Reading this report I get the impression Mr Shah was driving a private hire vehicle. There are three private hire firms slap bang in the middle of the gay village and because of price the gay community prefer to use these companies rather than Manchester black cabs.

The story gives clues that suggest the vehicle in question was not a black cab.
......................................

July 29, 2003

HEADLINE: After 18 months in jail, man has conviction for gay sex attack quashed

A taxi driver who has served an 18-month jail sentence for a gay sex attack at knifepoint had his conviction quashed by appeal court judges yesterday.

Hasham Shah, 39, from Manchester, served his full sentence after the jury found him guilty of false imprisonment and the indecent assault of a student he was driving home.

His accuser, who was not named, eventually admitted to the police that he had made up the story and in April was jailed for 15 months for perverting the course of justice.

Mr Justice Scott Baker, sitting with Mr Justice Gibbs and Judge Tom Crowther in the appeal court in London, said Mr Shah had picked up his accuser from the Gay Village in Manchester city centre in April 2000. His passenger complained to the police that Mr Shah had locked him in the cab and forced him at knife point to perform indecent acts.

Mr Shah maintained it was his accuser who had forced himself upon him. The jury at Manchester crown court did not believe him and he was convicted in January 2001.

It was not until November last year that his accuser finally confessed that he had lied.

"In those circumstances," Mr Justice Scott Baker said, "It is obvious to us that Mr Shah's conviction cannot be sustained." He added that Mr Shah had made it clear that he was not gay.

A letter was read to the court in which Mr Shah told how the case had affected him and his wife. "What everyone is forgetting is that the small amount of sexual activity which took place was because he assaulted me, and I was scared because I could not get out of the cab.

"Only two people were in the cab that awful night, and I was having a nightmare - not fun. If people had done their jobs right . . . my life and that of my wife would not be ruined.

"He should be registered as a danger to the public. There are so many things left unsaid."

Mr Justice Scott Baker quashed the conviction and ruled that there should be no retrial. He concluded: "This court has very considerable sympathy with the applicant."

Outside the court, Mr Shah's counsel Christopher Diamond said his client had lost his job as a licensed black cab driver as a result of the false allegation.
...................................

I'm confused by the passage above.

Is Mr Shah saying sexual activity took place? And if so, that he had no means to stop it taking place? Is Mr Shah also saying that he was forced to perform a sexual act on a Gay man? Or that the Gay man raped him by forcibly performing a sexual act on Mr Shah?

I wonder why this gay man would admit several years after the event that he lied, knowing full well he would probably get a custodial sentence of some considerable time? What would compel a man to go to jail and relinquish his freedom under such circumstances? Perhaps the Gay man is full of remorse?

I suppose we might all have visions of this Gay man getting into the private hire vehicle sitting in the front passenger seat next to the driver.

Considering the driver admits that sexual activity did take place do we assume that the sexual activity was consensual? We all drive cabs so we don't have to be a Perry Mason to visualise what might have taken place in this instance?

If I was a man of 38 there is no way I would let a student sat beside me force my pecker out of my pants and give me a blow job? Unless of course I wanted him to? lol

In my opinion the driver probably got a blow job off this gay guy and it all went pear shaped?

I suppose its all down to who you believe as to how the blow job came about and whether or not this gay guy was offered an incentive several years after the fact to change his story?

We had a recent incident in Bury where it is claimed a witness was enticed with financial reward to change her story and when she wouldn't do it she was threatened with physical harm. As always I am open minded to the events surrounding this incident because there are too many boxes that remain unticked.

If this driver accepted sexual favours or the conviction remained there is no way he would have got a Taxi license. The chances are he would have been placed on the sexual register and that would have been the end of his aspirations of ever driving a cab again?

So we have to ask ourselves is there an incentive for this driver to pervert the course of justice by offering the accuser a substantial bribe in order to once again drive a taxi? Would a years earnings of say 20 grand be enough to make someone change their story and serve a prison sentence?

When you consider the fact that there was no way Mr Shah was going to get a license if the verdict remained in tact, then you have to wonder why this gay person had a sudden sense of remorse or public duty which left him with no other option than to relinquish his freedom?

Regards

JD

The plot thickens, if this was indeed a black cab driver how did he come to be in the back of his cab with the passenger? My blow job theory is blown to pieces because it seems this is nothing more than a case of self gratification with a slight of hand? I'm still wondering where this assault took place? For any assault to have taken place both participants would have had to have been in close proximity to each other and considering there has been no reference to the assault taking place while the driver was sat in the front of his cab one can only assume that the assault took place while the driver was in the back of the cab? So how did the driver get in the back of the cab in the first place in order for him to be assaulted?
.....................................

R v Shah

COURT OF APPEAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION

[2003] All ER (D) 462 (Jul)

HEARING-DATES: 28 July 2003

28 July 2003

Summary

The complainant was a student who, in the early hours of the morning, had hailed a taxi driven by the defendant and asked to be driven to his halls of residence. He alleged that the defendant had locked him in his taxi, threatened him with a knife and masturbated, touching the complainant's genitals.

The defendant's case had been that the complainant had initiated the encounter and had assaulted him. The defendant was convicted of false imprisonment and sexual assault on a male.

Subsequently, the complainant, who had voluntarily attended a police station and admitted having made a false complaint, pleaded guilty to an offence of doing an act tending and intended to pervert the course of justice. The defendant appealed against conviction, which was uncontested by the Crown.

The appeal would be allowed.

The court had very great sympathy with the defendant whose convictions clearly could not stand.

COUNSEL:
Christopher Diamond (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.; The Crown did not appear and was not represented.

PANEL: SCOTT BAKER LJ, GIBBS J AND THE RECORDER OF BRISTOL
..............................................

You have such a way with words

would have made a good headline though (no pun)

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Which is a terrible shape to be in

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

The whole story sounds verry iffy to me.

_________________
stressed controller!!!

It would be interesting to know the reason why this cab driver jumped into the back of his cab with the passenger?

And it might shed more light on the situation if it was clarified what actually took place after the cabby had got in the back of the cab?

I find it hard to reconcile the fact that a cab driver who jumps in the back of his cab with a passenger can justify saying the passenger forced himself upon him?

I know the initial response was to feel sympathy for this cab driver because he is being portrayed as a victim of a miscarriage of justice. However when you look at the facts surrounding this case there are more imponderables than an "Agatha Christie" who done it?

Regards

JD

After investigating this matter I've found out that Mr Shah was indeed driving a Black cab. Therefore we have to ask ourselves what was MR Shah doing in the back of his cab with a guy who only swings one way?

Mr Shah said the woolly woofter made advances to him and he couldn't get out of his cab? Well he certainly had no problem getting out of his cab and into the back seat, so how does Mr Shah account for that?

Another point is that Solicitor Aubrey Issaacson phoned the Bury Times with the story hoping they would run it in order for his client to get some exposure? lol

If we ever get the answer why he jumped in the back of his cab with a woolly woofter then we might be a little closer to the truth? However I see this as an ongoing news story and until all the facts are revealed we should treat the original story with caution?

In the meantime I'm going to put the facts to Taxi Today readers and see what they make of this tangled web?

Regards

JD

PMSL

Wooly woofter , ages since I heard that expression.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin