RAJA YASIN FROM HALIFAX SENTENCED TO 21 YEARS FOR SEX CRIMES AND PERVERTING JUSTICE
| Red Rose Database
Halifax Rapist
In a case that has sent shockwaves through the Halifax community, Raja Yasin, a 65-year-old man with no fixed address, was handed a severe 21-year prison sentence at Bradford Crown Court in April 2018. The conviction followed a series of heinous sex offenses involving four young girls, two of whom were subjected to rape, highlighting the grave danger he posed to the public.
Yasin’s crimes, which spanned multiple incidents, included rape, indecent assault, and sexual assault. The presiding judge, Mr. Justice Lewis, described him as a 'dangerous' individual whose actions warranted a lengthy incarceration. In addition to his prison term, Yasin was ordered to serve an extra three years on licence after his release, emphasizing the seriousness with which the court viewed his threat to society.
The case also involved allegations of perverting the course of justice, which Yasin was found guilty of. The court heard that the evidence against him was substantial, but his legal team, led by barrister Michael Wolkind QC, challenged the safety of the convictions. They requested that new evidence be considered, claiming that the original verdict might have been flawed.
One of the key witnesses was a young girl who initially provided her testimony through a recorded interview. However, during cross-examination in court, she suddenly claimed that her previous statements were false and that Yasin had not assaulted or raped her. After leaving the witness box, she confided in a care worker that she had lied during her testimony. This led police officers to speak with her again, and she was recalled to give further evidence.
During her second testimony, the girl admitted she was 'scared' and that her earlier statement was a lie, revealing that she had falsely accused Yasin of crimes he did not commit. The defense argued that the court should not have allowed her to be recalled, asserting that this was unfair and potentially prejudicial. However, Mr. Justice Lewis clarified that the judge had the discretion to recall witnesses and was justified in doing so given the circumstances.
Furthermore, the defense claimed that new evidence regarding the witness’s credibility should have influenced the verdict. The court, however, dismissed this argument, stating that the issues raised had already been considered by the jury during the trial.
It was also revealed that Yasin had prior convictions dating back to 1995 for engaging in sexual activity with an underage girl. Despite his age and health concerns, the court maintained that the sentence was appropriate, fair, and proportionate to the severity of his crimes.
In the end, the appeal was rejected, and Yasin’s lengthy imprisonment was upheld, serving as a stark reminder of the justice system’s commitment to protecting vulnerable victims and ensuring that those who commit such grave offenses are held accountable.
Yasin’s crimes, which spanned multiple incidents, included rape, indecent assault, and sexual assault. The presiding judge, Mr. Justice Lewis, described him as a 'dangerous' individual whose actions warranted a lengthy incarceration. In addition to his prison term, Yasin was ordered to serve an extra three years on licence after his release, emphasizing the seriousness with which the court viewed his threat to society.
The case also involved allegations of perverting the course of justice, which Yasin was found guilty of. The court heard that the evidence against him was substantial, but his legal team, led by barrister Michael Wolkind QC, challenged the safety of the convictions. They requested that new evidence be considered, claiming that the original verdict might have been flawed.
One of the key witnesses was a young girl who initially provided her testimony through a recorded interview. However, during cross-examination in court, she suddenly claimed that her previous statements were false and that Yasin had not assaulted or raped her. After leaving the witness box, she confided in a care worker that she had lied during her testimony. This led police officers to speak with her again, and she was recalled to give further evidence.
During her second testimony, the girl admitted she was 'scared' and that her earlier statement was a lie, revealing that she had falsely accused Yasin of crimes he did not commit. The defense argued that the court should not have allowed her to be recalled, asserting that this was unfair and potentially prejudicial. However, Mr. Justice Lewis clarified that the judge had the discretion to recall witnesses and was justified in doing so given the circumstances.
Furthermore, the defense claimed that new evidence regarding the witness’s credibility should have influenced the verdict. The court, however, dismissed this argument, stating that the issues raised had already been considered by the jury during the trial.
It was also revealed that Yasin had prior convictions dating back to 1995 for engaging in sexual activity with an underage girl. Despite his age and health concerns, the court maintained that the sentence was appropriate, fair, and proportionate to the severity of his crimes.
In the end, the appeal was rejected, and Yasin’s lengthy imprisonment was upheld, serving as a stark reminder of the justice system’s commitment to protecting vulnerable victims and ensuring that those who commit such grave offenses are held accountable.