TikTok murder accomplices have appeals dismissed

Three people found guilty of manslaughter over the deaths of two men in a high-speed car chase have had their bids to challenge their convictions refused.

Saqib Hussain and Mohammed Hashim Ijazuddin, both 21, were killed in February 2022 on the A46 in Leicestershire, after being ambushed in a car park in Leicester by a group including TikTok influencer Mahek Bukhari and her mother Ansreen Bukhari.

Ameer Jamal, Sanaf Gulammustafa and Natasha Akhtar, who were all in one of the cars which had pursued Mr Hussain and Mr Ijazuddin, had been convicted of manslaughter.

At a Court of Appeal hearing on Tuesday, appeals by the trio against their convictions were dismissed by judges.

The fatal chase had followed a confrontation with Hussain, who a trial heard had threatened to use sexually-explicit material to expose a long-running affair he had been having with Ansreen Bukhari, who was married.

Both Hussain and Ijazuddin died when their car left the dual carriageway shortly afterwards, with prosecutors saying during a three-month murder trial at Leicester Crown Court that they were deliberately rammed off the road.

Ansreen and Mahek Bukhari were subsequently convicted of murder with two others - Rekhan Karwan and Raees Jamal - while Ameer Jamal, Gulammustafa and Akhtar were found guilty of manslaughter.

Mahek Bukhari was originally given a life sentence for murder with a minimum term of 31 years and eight months, but the Court of Appeal reduced the minimum term to 26 years and 285 days.

Rekhan Karwan and Raees Jamal were jailed for life with a minimum of 26 years and 10 months and 31 years respectively, while Ansreen Bukhari was given a life sentence with a minimum term of 26 years and nine months.

After a successful Court of Appeal challenge over their sentences last year, Ameer Jamal was sentenced to 12 years and eight months in prison, Gulamustafa given a sentence of 12 years and nine months and Akhtar was handed nine years and eight months in prison.

But Ameer Jamal, Gulammustafa and Akhtar brought appeals against the manslaughter convictions to the Court of Appeal in London earlier in July.

Judges were told that each of the three admitted to being a passenger in the car but denied being part of any plan to harm Mr Hussain and were unaware that their car would ram Mr Hussain's.

Lawyers for the trio argued that while they were convicted of unlawful act manslaughter - which requires an unlawful action to take place which caused death - the trial judge had not identified this "base" offence in the questions jurors had to consider.

However, three judges dismissed their appeals.

Lord Justice Jeremy Baker, sitting with Mr Justice Bryan and Judge Simon Hirst, said: "We consider that in the context of this case, where there was no question but that those involved in the plan were intent on inflicting unlawful violence upon Saquib Hussain, these questions appropriately set out the matters which the jury had to consider.

"The jury would have been well aware that the common plan which was being referred to was the plan to attack Saqib Hussain when he arrived at Tesco's car park, in order to kill him, or to cause him to suffer either really serious bodily harm, or some lesser degree of harm."

Listen to BBC Radio Leicester on Sounds and follow BBC Leicester on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.