"We cannot get the evidence out of those laptops."
A former money exchange bureau boss has sued the Met Police in a bid to recover nearly £600,000 confiscated by officers after the CPS failed to prove a £34 million money laundering case against him.
At the centre of Ahsan Javaid’s case against the Met are four laptops, which were seized during raids in November 2017 and returned after nearly four years.
Mr Javaid claimed his devices were manipulated, with passwords changed and key evidence to support his rightful ownership of the seized cash destroyed.
Mr Javaid, his wife Amna Gulzar and two others were arrested in November 2017.
They were charged in May 2018 with conspiring to launder £34 million between 2012 and 2018, mainly to Pakistan, with false identities by setting up bogus companies and accounts.
They allegedly stored cash in 43 bank accounts before transferring the money from the UK to Pakistan and other countries.
But they were acquitted due to the “systemic and catastrophic” disclosure failings by the prosecution, ill-preparedness and the lack of evidence.
Judge Charles Falk condemned the CPS after the prosecution body asked for more time to investigate and prepare evidence — nearly two months into the trial scheduled.
He said: “Catastrophic failure has come about because the investigation exponentially grew in size without sufficient manpower, resources, training or expertise being allocated to it.”
Despite being acquitted, Mr Javaid’s money remained frozen and police said it was recoverable money under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA).
He has now taken the Met Police to court.
Mr Javaid said he and his family were put through a nightmare for several years and believe his treatment was due to his Pakistani origin.
He told Geo News: “The monies we sent to Pakistan were remittance transfers.
“There was no money laundering or criminality of any kind. We sent money from poor and working-class people from the UK to Pakistan.
“Our companies were registered with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
“The police charged us in May 2018 accusing us of money laundering.
“We said from day one that we were not involved in any kind of money laundering but nobody believed us but after nearly four years we were proven right and innocent as the prosecution failed to prove anything against us.
“The prosecution said they were fully prepared with evidence and tried to put us under pressure to plead guilty but we refused as we were not guilty.
“The trial started on the prosecution’s request and then the prosecution told the court it was not prepared.
“It was established in the court that the money was sent to Pakistan through banking means and everything was documented and declared.”
According to Mr Javaid, the prosecution’s failure was down to them not being able to prove anything against him.
Speaking about his laptops, he said:
“The police withheld evidence that was capable of supporting my case, interfered with my ability to provide relevant evidence and prevented me from accessing my laptops, which contained evidence of the legitimacy of the trading activities of the companies.
“We believe the police changed the passwords and manipulated the deviance.
“We cannot get the evidence out of those laptops.
“We are now asking the court to order a forensic inspection of our laptops to determine what the police did to the machines.
“I am fighting for justice and asking the court to hold the police accountable on the matter of playing with the laptops and the evidence.”
He complained that he was a victim of the police.
“I and my family suffered a lot throughout.
“When the case started, I was on a Pakistani passport and was put on the flight risk. I remained in the police custody for over 27 months without committing any crime.
“The police tried to complicate things as much as it could but in the end the truth prevailed and we won.”
“I am sure we will win the civil proceedings case too. My case is against the police’s POCA powers.”
The Met Police said: “Following the conclusion of criminal proceedings, the Met made nine applications for cash forfeiture and the forfeiture of sums subject to account freezing orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
“In January 2023, at Stratford Magistrates Court, a district judge ordered forfeiture in full of the detained cash and frozen funds.
“We are aware these forfeiture orders are now subject to appeal and as such, we are unable to comment any further at this time.”
Denying that they manipulated the laptops, the force added:
“An issue was raised about the return of laptops seized during the criminal investigation.
“We dispute any allegations that the passwords to these laptops were changed or the laptops unlawfully tampered with in any way.”
Loading ...