Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sat May 02, 2026 4:57 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Taxi driver who groped 19-year-old passenger jailed

A taxi driver has been jailed for sexually assaulting a 19-year-old woman he was dropping home after a night out.

Muhammad Zia kissed the woman's hand and put his hand on the inside of her thigh, while the car doors were locked, a court heard. He then grabbed her when she got out of the vehicle.

Zia, of Paxton Road, Stourbridge, was told by Judge Michael Challinor said: "Taxis play an important role in keeping people, especially young women, safe at night. To that extent taxi drivers are trusted.

"If you breach that trust, you will go to prison as a deterrent and punishment to let others know as taxi drivers they must behave appropriately at all times, or they will be punished as you will be punished."

On October 25, 2014, the victim had been out with friends, and was not 'in the habit' of drinking alcohol.

Mr Thomas Spratt, prosecuting, said on this occasion she had 'consumed a lot', and as a result decided to head home.

At the time Zia, aged 39, had been employed as a taxi driver and picked the victim up in the early hours of October 26.

Once at her house, Zia took her hand and kissed it, then placed his hand on the inside of her thigh.

Mr Spratt said she was unable to get out of the taxi as the child locks were on.

The victim's statement, read to the court, said Zia got out of the cab, walked around to the passenger side and opened the door.

She attempted to walk past him but he stood in front of her, grabbing her and physically restraining her, and began to plead with her that he should be allowed to go into the house. She pulled from his grip, and went into the house.

The next morning the victim told her mother what happened, who then called police.

Mr Thomas Schofield, mitigating, said Zia was previously of 'impeccable character', and references given to the judge speak of another side to him.

A pre-sentence report assesses his risk of re-offending as low, and Mr Schofield said: "This is a man who has already been significantly punished for what he has done by the loss of his licence as a taxi driver, and the and the consequential financial difficulties."

Zia is now 'entirely supported' by his wife, and they are having difficulty paying their mortgage.

He was convicted of sexual assault at Dudley Magistrates Court in June, and committed to Wolverhampton Crown Court for sentence.

He was jailed for six months and will also have to notify as a sex offender for seven years.

Since the court proceedings, Zia has suffered depression and anxiety, and was taken to hospital by ambulance in July.

Upon sentencing, Judge Challinor said the victim had been unwell and wanted to go home in the early hours of October 26.

He said: "She hailed your taxi and you asked her to sit in the front of the cab. Shortly thereafter you began to molest her by kissing her hand and putting your hand on her thigh close to her vaginal area.

"She was trapped in the taxi because of the child locks. It was the early hours of the morning and to that extent she was vulnerable to your advances.

"This was deliberate touching of this young girl with a view to a sexual encounter. It was not penetrative but was nonetheless distressing."

source: http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2015 ... passenger/

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 7:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
captain cab wrote:
He was jailed for six months and will also have to notify as a sex offender for seven years.

Which does beg the question why the lower court didn't deal with it in the first place.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
Sussex wrote:
captain cab wrote:
He was jailed for six months and will also have to notify as a sex offender for seven years.

Which does beg the question why the lower court didn't deal with it in the first place.



My thoughts to, can magistrates go up to 12 months?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
Nidge2 wrote:
Sussex wrote:
captain cab wrote:
He was jailed for six months and will also have to notify as a sex offender for seven years.

Which does beg the question why the lower court didn't deal with it in the first place.



My thoughts to, can magistrates go up to 12 months?

Yes, but not in this instance.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
The Magistrates only have to decide that if they hear the case they may be too limited in sentencing options and so they pass it to the Higher Court. The miscreant could plead guilty and it could still be passed upwards. It does not mean the Higher Court has to use a sentence unavailable to the Magistrates.

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
The Mags can hear the case, can decide on guilt or otherwise, and then pass it up for sentencing if, in their view, the sentence should be greater than one which they could pass.

In this case the higher court gave a sentence that the lower court could have.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2015 9:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
On passing it up, the sentence was the decision of the Judge. He is not constrained by the decision of the Magistrates.

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2015 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57355
Location: 1066 Country
Chris the Fish wrote:
On passing it up, the sentence was the decision of the Judge. He is not constrained by the decision of the Magistrates.

My point is that the judge has the same sentencing guidelines as the magistrates, he deemed it right to sentence to a level that the magistrates could have.

They didn't, and I'm surprised at that due to there being pressure to keep stuff in the lower court.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 8:58 pm
Posts: 3568
Location: Plymouth
On those points I agree. But without knowing the guidelines it is impossible to know if the sentence was at the bottom end and potentially could have been (much) higher.

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 691 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group