This is about the murder of Sara Sharif. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) released a statement following the sentencing of Sara Sharif’s father, Urfan Sharif, and stepmother, Beinash Batool. The CPS described Sara as a “lively and joyful 10-year-old girl whose life was tragically cut short by the very people who should have protected and cared for her.” They emphasised that the case painted a “devastating picture” of the suffering Sara experienced before her death and highlighted the “shocking disregard for her life” demonstrated by the defendants’ actions after her death.
But all the people responsible for multiple systemic failures leading to the murder, are not sleeping in prison!
Warning: Stop reading this article now, if you’re likely to suffer with post-traumatic symptoms. You have been told. If you do not leave now and suffer adverse consequences, you must sue yourself! [Click this for our terms and conditions]
Synopsis
Sarah died on 8th August 2024, having suffered a traumatic brain injury, 25 fractures, an ulcerated burn to her buttocks and scalding to her ankles. The Independent 2024-12-17 reported,
Neighbours had reported screaming and shouting, as well as obscene language being used towards Sara. Her school teachers had commented on bruises and had approached Batool, yet no action was taken when Sara was removed from the classroom and homeschooled.
Sara Sharif’s tragic story is a harrowing reminder of the failures in the system meant to protect her. Born into a tumultuous environment, Sara was subjected to a campaign of abuse that ultimately led to her untimely death. Her father, Urfan Sharif, and stepmother, Beinash Batool, were found guilty of her murder after a ten-week trial. The jury at the Old Bailey heard that Sara endured weeks of assaults and abuse, resulting in severe injuries including fractures, burns, bruising, and a traumatic head injury. The postmortem concluded that Sara died from complications from multiple injuries and neglect, without a definitive cause of death.
On 8 August 2023, Sara’s stepmother called a travel agency to inquire about flights to Pakistan. Her father eventually booked one-way flights for the next day, claiming his cousin had died. On 10 August, Urfan Sharif called the police from Pakistan, admitting he had “legally punished” Sara and she had died. He later claimed he had beaten her but did not intend to kill her. Police found Sara’s body in the family home with a note written by Urfan, saying he had killed her and had “lost it”. The trio returned to the UK on 13 September 2023 and were arrested on arrival.
Libby Clark from the Crown Prosecution Service described Sara as a lively and joyful 10-year-old girl whose life was tragically cut short by the very people who should have protected and cared for her. The evidence painted a devastating picture of the suffering Sara experienced leading up to her death and the campaign of abuse she endured in her own family home. Her injuries revealed the extent of the cruelty inflicted upon her, while the defendants’ actions after her death demonstrated a shocking disregard for her life as they attempted to flee the country to evade justice, thinking only of themselves. While her father and stepmother were responsible for subjecting Sara to horrific abuse, her uncle took no action to stop or report it. This complex and distressing case was brought to justice thanks to the tireless work of the prosecution team, Surrey Police, international partners, and the CPS International Unit.
At court and media coverage
Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.
If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.
Full sentencing remarks (26 pages)
Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.
If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.
Sara Sharif: Children’s Commissioner responds to sentencing.
Timeline
The following is taken from What were the missed chances to prevent Sara Sharif’s death? [The Guardian 2024-12-12]. Tough if you don’t like The Guardian. The link does not mean I’m ‘a Guardian reader’ or love The Guardian and the converse is not true either! (Which means I do not hate The Guardian nor does The Guardain love me).
| Date | Event |
| 11 January 2013 | Sara Sharif is made the subject of a child protection plan at birth due to her father’s history of violence. |
| 22 February 2013 | Social services and police are informed that Sharif has slapped a child. |
| 7 May 2013 | A social worker notices a burn mark on a child’s leg; Sharif claims it was a barbecue accident. |
| 2014 | A child tells a social worker Sharif smashed up a TV and punched Domin. |
| November 2014 | Sara is taken into foster care briefly after a child reports a bite mark. She is later returned to her father. |
| December 2014 | A child tells a social worker they do not like Sharif because he punches them all over their body and gives them bruises. |
| 29 January 2015 | A social worker is told that Sharif waved a knife around at home in what he claimed was a “zombie” game. |
| February 2015 | A child tells their foster carer that Sharif used to hit them on the bottom with a belt. |
| 2015 | Olga Domin tells social services that Urfan Sharif tightened a belt around her neck. Sara is returned to Domin’s care later that year. |
| October 2019 | Sharif applies to Guildford family court for custody of Sara. |
| 6 June 2022 | A teacher spots a bruise under Sara’s left eye. |
| 10 March 2023 | A teacher spots Sara with bruises to her chin and right eye. |
| 17 March 2023 | Batool is overheard referring to children with derogatory terms in the playground. |
| 28 March 2023 | Batool claims a mark on Sara’s cheek, which appears to be a bruise, has been caused by a pen. |
| 17 April 2023 | Sharif informs the headteacher that he will be homeschooling Sara with immediate effect. |
Blindness out of Systemic Failures
This tragic case underscores a collective failure across multiple systems. When agencies fail to communicate effectively and act on critical information, vulnerable individuals like Sara fall through the cracks. It’s essential to have robust mechanisms in place to ensure that when red flags are raised, they are thoroughly investigated and acted upon.
There were multiple red flags and reports over the years, which makes it even more painful to see how the system failed to protect Sara. These organisations are meant to safeguard children, yet somehow, crucial signs were overlooked or not acted upon effectively.
The complexities of these cases often involve numerous factors, including overburdened social services, communication breakdowns between agencies, and sometimes even cultural or procedural biases. However, none of these justifications can excuse the failure to prevent such a tragic outcome.
Collective blindness in these situations often stems from systemic issues, like overburdened staff, lack of resources, and procedural shortcomings. Each agency plays a vital role, and their collaboration is crucial for safeguarding at-risk individuals.
See Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel: annual report 2023 to 2024 (12 December 2024). The report requires careful study. It is not the job of this site to spoon-feed all readers. An excerpt from the report follows:
This year, there were 330 SINs and rapid reviews submitted for serious incidents occurring between April 2023 and March 2024 where abuse and/or neglect was known or suspected. This represents a decrease of 72 SINs from the previous year, primarily due to a reduction in serious harm incidents notified to the Panel. The average number of SINs per month decreased from 33.5 in 2022 to 2023 to 27.5 this year. Almost half of the incidents were due to the death of a child, and almost half were due to serious harm. Key findings are listed below.
- The age distribution of children was very similar to last year, with under 1s still experiencing the most harm, representing over a third of all incidents. However, this year, children aged 16 to 17 made up the second largest age group, overtaking the 11-to-15-year age group, which has been the second largest group for the last few years.
- There continues to be a fairly even split between boys (55%) and girls (45%), with observed variation when accounting for age.
- As identified last year, compared to the child population in England, children with a mixed/multiple ethnic background and Black/African/Caribbean/Black British children were over-represented in the reviews, while children from Asian/ Asian British ethnicities or other ethnic groups were under-represented. We have observed variation when looking at ethnicity and age together.
- Unexplained Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy or Childhood (SUDI/SUDC) was the most common likely cause of death (23%), followed by suicide (16%). Girls experienced higher rates of suicide than boys (21% versus 12%). Extrafamilial child homicide and extrafamilial fatal assaults were the most likely causes of deaths of boys (21%) compared to just one girl. • Overall, the most common cause of serious harm was intrafamilial non-fatal assault with (30%), followed by non-fatal neglect (14%). Girls were more likely to suffer both intrafamilial and extrafamilial child sexual abuse combined than boys (32% versus 4%). However, boys experienced double the rate of both intrafamilial and extrafamilial non-fatal assaults compared to girls (54% versus 27%).
- In almost 9 out of 10 incidents, the family of the child in focus was known to children’s social care (CSC), either as an open case or was previously known to CSC, similar to 2022 to 2023. Just over a quarter of children were either on, or had previously been on, a child protection plan. Around a sixth of children were classed as ‘looked after’ either at the time of the incident or previously, and 21% were subject to care orders or care proceedings.
- Over a fifth of children were recorded as having a mental health condition, either diagnosed or undiagnosed. In the 20 reviews where the diagnosed mental health condition was thought to be linked to the incident, 70% of children died, all of whom completed suicide.
- Notably, in a quarter of incidents, at least one parent or relevant adult was reported to have either a physical, mental health-related, learning or developmental disability, a substantial increase from the previous year. In just over half of the incidents, at least one parent was reported to have one or more mental health conditions, and in 43% of reviews, there was a parent with an addiction to or misuse of alcohol and/ or substances.
Not the first or last
There have been several tragic cases in the UK over the past 20 years where child protection systems failed.
- Victoria Climbié (2000): Victoria was an eight-year-old girl who died after suffering horrific abuse and neglect at the hands of her guardians. Her death led to significant changes in child protection policies in the UK1.
- Peter Connelly (Baby P) (2007): Peter was a 17-month-old boy who died after enduring months of abuse from his mother, her boyfriend, and their lodger. His case highlighted serious failings in the child protection system and led to widespread reforms1.
- Daniel Pelka (2012): Daniel was a four-year-old boy who died after being subjected to severe abuse by his mother and her partner. His case exposed gaps in the system’s ability to detect and respond to child abuse1.
- Arthur Labinjo-Hughes (2020): Arthur was a six-year-old boy who died after suffering abuse from his father and stepmother. His case raised questions about the effectiveness of child protection services and the need for better coordination between agencies1.
- Star Hobson (2020): Star was a 16-month-old girl who died after being subjected to abuse by her mother and her mother’s partner. Her case highlighted the need for improved safeguarding measures and better support for vulnerable families1.
These cases are heartbreaking reminders of the importance of vigilance and effective intervention in protecting children.
The Big Picture
There are broader issues affecting other public services in the UK, such as the NHS and the police. These sectors often face similar challenges, including:
- Underfunding and budget cuts: Austerity measures and reduced funding have impacted various public services, leading to stretched resources and difficulties in meeting increasing demands.
- Staff shortages and burnout: Heavy workloads, complex cases, and understaffing contribute to burnout and high turnover rates among professionals in healthcare, social work, and law enforcement.
- Reactive approaches: Limited resources often force these sectors into reactive rather than preventative approaches, dealing with crises rather than addressing underlying issues.
- Bureaucracy and administrative burden: Excessive paperwork and administrative tasks can take professionals away from frontline work and reduce their capacity to address complex cases effectively.
Past, Present and Future
Figures in the public domain (available if Google is your friend) indicate that between 2010-11 and 2022-23, local authority spending in England shifted dramatically from early intervention services to late intervention services.
- Early intervention services saw a significant cut in funding, going from £4 billion in 2010-11 to £2.2 billion in 2022-23. These services focus on preventative measures to help families and children before problems escalate.
- Late intervention services saw a substantial increase in funding, going from £3.1 billion to £7 billion during the same period. These services are typically crisis-driven, such as residential care placements, which cost local authorities £2.4 billion in 2022-23.
This change in spending means that less money is being spent on preventative measures to support families and children, while more money is being spent on crisis intervention and resolving serious problems after they have occurred.
Do you need to be Social Services expert to see where that’s going? Sure you do – you’re not allowed to think for yourself!
Conclusion
Well, I’m allowed to think for myself, and I don’t need to be an expert to say that Britain’s public services are like ships with gaping holes, left to rot for the last five years at least. There is no dockyard. They’re on the open seas. The debt of underinvestment is too high to service, as the Nation enters a new era of austerity.
Vulnerable children are at risk, and cash injections won’t save them. They need entirely new systems, but the money’s gone. If you don’t know where your name must be Rip van Winkle. You’re not to know anything about the following wastes of public money (estimates):
Bond buying losses (2022-2023): £170 billion back to BOE
HS2 (2009-ongoing): £55 billion+ (unclear), some £600 million per mile
PPE (2020-2022): £14.9 billion (Financial Times estimate)
Test and Trace (2020-2022): £11 billion [Total COVID related fraud – £21 billion]
Botched servicing UK government debt (2022): £11 billion
CNST – the ‘annual cost of harm’ (2022/23): £6.3 billion
Fine to EU over cheap Chinese imports (2017): £2.3 billion
Fighting doctors’ strikes (2023): £2 billion
NHS agency staff (2022-2023): £4.6 billion (18.7% increase on 2021-22) – current non-government estimates are circa £10 billion/annum.
Levelling up contract losses (2022-2023): £500 million
RAAC debacle (2023-ongoing): >£250 million
Post Office Horizon scandal (2000-ongoing): circa £2 billion
Universal Credit IT system (2010-ongoing): ~£2 billion+
NHS Digital Programme (2002-2011): ~£10 billion
Aircraft Carriers (Queen Elizabeth-class) (2008-2020): ~£6.2 billion
Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) delays (2009-2022): Overrun of ~£4 billion (final cost ~£18.9 billion)
Nuclear decommissioning (Ongoing, major estimates from 2010s): Estimated lifetime cost £120 billion+
Smart Meter rollout (2011-ongoing): ~£11 billion+
Brexit preparations (2016-2020): Estimates vary, around £4-6 billion
Asylum seeker accommodation (2020-ongoing): ~£2 billion per year in recent years
‘Hotel Rwanda’ – £400 million
And now your elected masters’ solutions are tax-raids left right and centre!
The sinking ships are taking our future down with them. You may not like reality – in which case find the nearest pile of sand!
Off you pop!
