Sheffield taxi driver jailed for rape he didn't commit: Police failures have ruined my life

Police probe launched into wrongful rape conviction

For Safraz, it was an unremarkable job on a busy but ordinary night of being a taxi driver in one of Yorkshire’s biggest cities, Sheffield. Little did the father-of-three know the late-night journey would soon plunge him into a nightmare that would end with him in prison, convicted of a rape he had never committed.

It took the tenacity of family and friends to eventually clear his name after he had spent 18 months in jail as they uncovered vital telephone records that proved he was on a conference call at the time of the alleged incident - evidence which South Yorkshire Police and the Crown Prosecution Service claimed did not exist and was never presented to the jury in his original trial.

Almost four years after his conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal because of the new evidence and following the lead detective in the case admitting he had “made mistakes” in his investigation, Safraz has decided to come forward to tell his story to The Yorkshire Post.

Safraz, not his real name, has decided to tell his story following the CPS announcing a review of all rape and serious sexual assault cases last month in light of the collapse of a number of high profile trials because of evidence disclosure failures.

He said he was particularly shocked by the case of Liam Allan, a 22-year-old student who was wrongly accused of rape and whose trial collapsed after the Met Police were ordered to hand over thousands of text message records that proved he was innocent but which had not been disclosed to lawyers.

Safraz says the parallels with his case have led him to speak out to highlight that similar investigative failings have been occurring for years.

He does not wish to disclose his identity as his original case never received any press coverage and does not want to affect his family or his future job prospects.

But he has shared court documents and transcripts with The Yorkshire Post relating to his case that raise serious questions about how the investigation was handled.

Now 30 and a father-of-four, he tells his story in a Sheffield cafe on an overcast day with a mixture of righteous anger and weary disbelief.

Safraz says the first he heard of the allegation was a couple of days after his shift on December 3, 2011 when he received a call from his taxi firm explaining the police wanted to speak to him.

“I had a knock at my door and I was arrested on suspicion of rape. I was in absolute shock, I couldn’t even remember which job they were talking about where this was supposed to have happened until I got to the Sheffield Parkway and they gave me some detail about what the allegation was.

“It took me some time to remember who they were talking about as I had 25 to 30 jobs that night. It had just been an ordinary job, just business as usual.”

He learned the allegation was that while driving her home, he had stopped in a lay-by, climbed between the front seats into the back and raped her before getting back in the front seat and driving away and dropping her off at her home. The entire incident was said to have occurred within two minutes and 50 seconds between the complainant ending one phone call with her boyfriend and then starting another one.

Safraz says: “It was the first time I had ever been in a police station, I’m just an ordinary citizen. They did offer me a free solicitor but I refused to take one because I said I had nothing to hide. I answered every single question asked by the police, the interview lasted about two hours. I had faith the police would find the truth and I wanted to find them information to help them find the real perpetrator if there had been one.”

One of the key pieces he told police back in the December 2011 interview was that during the time when the alleged incident happened, he had been on a lengthy three-way conference call with colleagues who would be able to confirm nothing had happened.

Safraz was not charged until July 2012 and the trial took place in January 2013, over a year after the alleged incident and subsequent police interview.

But a court transcript shows that the detective constable who led the investigation told the trial that the phone records relating to the potential conference were not available as the data gets overwritten after a year. He said he made enquiries about the matter a week before the trial was due to start.

The detective accepted under cross-examination that if records had shown the conference call was taking place during the alleged incident, it may indicate that Safraz “possibly wasn’t responsible” for a rape.

When asked whether he was content with the way he had investigated the matter, the officer replied: “Clearly now that I have made mistakes, I have to accept that.”

The other two men on the conference call were called as witnesses in Safraz’s defence but were cross-examined on the basis “they had simply concocted this evidence to protect a friend”.

After a ten-day trial, Safraz was convicted by a jury at Sheffield Crown Court of rape and subsequently sentenced to seven years in prison.

He says: “You can’t understand how important this evidence was for the whole case - if I had been lying, it would have proved it.

“You can’t really blame the jury because if this evidence was in front of them, their verdict might have been different.

“But I had been let down by the police and let down by the justice system. I cried for half-an-hour, I couldn’t control my emotions. I knew I was going to prison for a very long time.

“If I had really done something, I would have accepted it on the first day, I wouldn’t have gone through the trial, I would have taken 100 years in prison if that was the sentence. But there was never any guilt, I couldn’t accept something I hadn’t done.”

However, soon after the case his family and friends travelled to London to visit the offices of the phone company involved to see if any records could be recovered. It was quickly established they were in fact still retrievable from the company’s head office in India.

An appeal against the conviction was lodged and in July 2014, the case was heard by the Court of Appeal and Safraz’s conviction quashed after 18 harrowing months in jail.

The court’s judgement highlighted the lack of forensic evidence, as well as the prosecution’s acceptance during the trial that the complainant must have been mistaken about the location of the incident despite her being “adamant” in her evidence about where it had taken place.

But it said the new evidence showing Safraz had been on the conference call for over 29 minutes during the time of the alleged incident meant the conviction was unsafe.

The ruling states: “The defence legal team were told on the first day of the trial that no such records relating were available.

“The officer in the case was examined about this and other aspects. The officer was very frank. He accepted that there had been shortcomings in investigation in a number of respects. He was asked questions with regard to the potential relevance of the conference call taking place during the window of two minutes and 50 seconds. He conceded that if there had been such evidence of a conference call taking place covering that period, it might suggest "possibly he was not responsible".

“That is by no means an overstatement of the position, as it seems to us.”

It adds: “It now appears from the evidence that the officer in charge of the case had relied to some extent on the Crown Prosecution Service, and to some extent on colleagues of his, and they had taken it from their knowledge and contact with mobile phone companies generally that such records would not be available. That, in effect, was the assumption. But in the event it is shown to be wrong because such records did, in fact, still exist and were capable of being obtained.

“It clearly was important evidence, given the nature of the Crown's case that the alleged rape had occurred within that two minutes and 50 seconds, when on the defence case the conference call lasted throughout this relevant period and nothing had been heard by the other two men.

“There were a significant number of points available to the defence already. This further point may well have had (it is not for us to say whether it would have had) a significant or decisive impact on the jury for the purposes of its determination and ultimate verdict. As we see it, the jury may well have reached a different conclusion had this evidence been before it.”

Because of the serious nature of the case, the Court of Appeal said a retrial should be ordered but stressed four times that the evidence should be reviewed by a “fresh eye” within the CPS before any further trial took place due to the “very concerning features about this matter”.

Safraz was freed and four days before his retrial was due to start, the case against him was dropped with the CPS offering no evidence.

He says today: “The judge said ‘You are free to go’. It was a mixture of emotions - relief but also anger after being let down so badly by the justice system and the police.”

Clearing his name was a huge moment but it has been far from a happy ending in the years since.

“The first two years I was really struggling and I’m still struggling to sleep. I’m traumatised by what has happened. For the first two years I didn’t know what to do, I wasn’t thinking straight.

“The Liam Allan case really pushed me to come forward. I thought this time, I need to speak out for other people.

“When I got out I went back to taxi driving. I was in huge debt - money had been borrowed from friends and family. I was working 18 to 20 hour days as I had a lot of people to pay back. I don’t like taxi driving and I want to do something better. But I have to feed my family.”

He says among the many difficult moments in the previous years was dealing with the stigma of the allegations affecting his family in the local Muslim community, as well as the first time he was remanded in custody for ten days after being charged.

“That was the first time I realised what was happening, I felt the whole system was against me rather than finding out the truth. I was in prison with rapists, murderers, paedophiles, you can’t explain it in words. You take an ordinary citizen off the street who is peaceful and law-abiding and put him in a cell with serious criminals, it was quite scary.”

Safraz has now submitted a formal complaint about the handling of his case to South Yorkshire Police ahead of potentially going to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

But he says several weeks after making the complaint, he is yet to receive any response or even acknowledgment.

Safraz says there are many unanswered questions about his case but is determined others should not go through a similar experience to him.

“I’m still scared by the police and the thought they might put me behind bars for another false allegation. That is partly why I didn’t speak out until today. But I have had enough now. After seeing other people suffering the way I have suffered, I can’t stop myself speaking out.”

A spokeswoman for South Yorkshire Police said: “South Yorkshire Police can confirm a complaint has been received in relation to this case by the Professional Standards Department. As enquiries are currently ongoing, it would not be appropriate to comment any further at this stage.”

The CPS did not respond to request for comment.