Appeal win ends four year battle for justice for Peterborough man

mohammed amin ENGEMN00120110413151323
mohammed amin ENGEMN00120110413151323
Have your say

A Peterborough man has won a four year fight to clear his name after being jailed for committing a violent robbery in the city.

Mohammed Amin, of Lincoln Road, was found guilty of robbery following a trial at Peterborough Crown Court in February 2011 and jailed for three years.

But the 30 year-old protested his innocence - and after a lengthy battle with the courts, was cleared of involvement in the violent incident this week.

Mr Amin had never been convicted of any criminal offences before being found guilty of the robbery.

He was cleared after Appeal Court judges in London said the conviction was not safe.

Sir Brian Leveson, sitting with Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Mr Justice Phillips at the court, will announce their reasons for quashing the conviction at a hearing on a future date.

Mr Amin claimed his conviction for the robbery had been a case of mistaken identity, but in February 2011 a jury found him guilty.

In 2011 Peterborough Crown Court was told the owner of the internet cafe had been assaulted with a wooden stick at the business on April 23 2010.

The attack caused a number of cuts and bruises, and the attacker ran off with a silver chain, described as being worth 250 Euros.

Immediately following the guilty verdict, Rodger Harrisson, defending Mr Amin, said he would be appealing the verdict.

The appeal was dismissed in October 2011, and Mr Amin served the three year sentence in prison.

But it was only when an investigation was launched by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) - the body which looks into possible miscarriages of justice - that the case was finally referred back to the Appeal Court in London.

A spokesman for the CCRC said: “The referral was based on several grounds including new evidence which potentially undermines witness identification evidence upon which the prosecution case depended, on the non-disclosure of photographs and CCTV relevant to the identification evidence at trial, and on the failure to give adequate jury directions relating to identification evidence.”

A spokesman for Cambridgeshire police said the case would not be re-opened following the successful appeal.