Immigration and asylum
Jabeen has appeared at Immigration Tribunals and dealt with a variety of matters, for example :
- Advice on completion of student visa applications, preparation of documents for submission on student visa appeals, and throughout the whole appeal process
- Settlement and spouse appeals
- Family visitor appeals
R V G currently instructed in a 11 handed drugs and firearms case. Miss Akhtar appears for the first defendant on the indictment. The defendants are all said to be part of an organised crime group involved in a large scale conspiracy to supply class A drugs. It is said that they keep their operation going by using various methods of control and intimidation. The gang is said to be heavily involved with firearms and involved in a number of shootings. Miss Akhtar’s client is alleged to be the “holder” of the guns and a trusted member of the group to supply class A drugs and firearms to the group as and when required.
R V M instructed in a 30 handed drugs conspiracy spanning over many months involving class A and B drugs conspiracies across the country. The case involved covert recordings, surveillance evidence, ANPR, cell site evidence and cross referencing of numerous phones that were involved. The defendant had a previous conviction for supply of class A drugs and was still on license when caught with a kilo of drugs on arrest. Miss Akhtar was able to achieve a very favourable outcome for the client.
R v Z This case involved the importation of class A drugs. There were a number of defendants involved. The defendant and his associates were under surveillance and were seen to receive the couple who returned with a suitcase full of class A drugs. They were all arrested and pleaded not guilty to the charges. After a six week trial Mr Z was the only defendant to be acquitted.
R v S The case involved importation of class A drugs secreted and sewn into leather jackets. The drugs were intercepted at the airport but the police allowed the drugs to be delivered to its destination to enable them to find out who was behind the operation. The defendant along with another male were seen to be waiting in a car nearby and as soon as they saw the delivery van, they got out to receive the package. Police surveillance operations were being carried out and both men along with a number of others were arrested. The defendant was acquitted after trial.
R v R The case involved a conspiracy to supply class B drugs. The defendant was arrested when a vehicle he was travelling in was stopped by the police. A search of the vehicle was carried out and drugs and a large number of phones were found within the vehicle. Prosecution experts were instructed and attributed a number of telephones to the defendant. One of the telephones said to be the clients was extremely damaging as it contained evidence of drug dealing. Miss Akhtar focussed her attention on the phone evidence and having done so was able to confidently assert to the prosecution that the “damaging” phone cannot be attributed to her client. Prosecution reviewed their position and offered no evidence against the client three weeks into the trial.
R v K The case involved a stabbing. The prosecution asserted that the defendant was responsible for stabbing a male multiple times in a carpark. There was CCTV evidence showing the stabbing. Prosecution relied on identification evidence from both the complainant and a number of police officers. The identification evidence was challenged and a successful application made to exclude the evidence. The defendant was unanimously acquitted at trial.