Taken from the Sara Sharif trial discussion fb page, its so awful.
This is the latest update of the continuing trial of those accused of the murder of ten-year-old Sara Sharif, in Horsell, Woking, in August 2023.
Court Hears Harrowing Evidence of Sara Sharif’s Injuries
Friday, October 25
At court today, statements from more neighbours of the Sharif family and Sara’s schoolteachers were read out. The court also heard statements from Dr Roland Kouble, a dental surgeon and forensic odontologist, and Mr Niall Martin, a consultant burns surgeon. No witnesses were called.
The first statement was from Brenin Lozeron, the husband of Judith Lozeron who gave evidence yesterday. The Lozerons lived next door to the Sharif family in Hammond Road.
In the statement, Mr Lozeron said he had little interaction with the children and always saw Sara in a hijab. He heard noise from the family in the garden, but “once they were in the house, we didn’t hear a thing”.
Evidence was also read out from Rebecca Daborn, the daughter of Brenin and Judith Lozeron. She described visiting 6 Hammond Road and their children playing together, but Sara wasn’t there. She said she found Beinash “easy to talk to, friendly, open”.
A statement was also read out from Fiona Mellon, whose rear garden is adjacent to the rear garden at 6 Hammond Road.
Ms Mellon described hearing a scream about five days before she spoke to police on August 11. It was around 4.30 or 5pm. She said she “just heard one scream for a couple of seconds that then stopped suddenly”, and that it sounded like a young female voice and different to Sara’s “screechy” sisters.
The neighbour said she it was so out of the ordinary that she wondered if she should call the police but didn’t hear anything further. For the next five or so days, Ms Mellon didn’t see the family at all.
Describing Sara as “spirited and outgoing” she said the last time she saw her was in July wearing her hijab.
Another statement was from Mia Carkett, Ms Mellon’s daughter, who said that Beinash would occasionally apologise to her mother if the children were being noisy. She noted that in the week before Sara’s body was found the family seemed quiet.
Evidence was also read out from Paul Kent, who lived two doors away in Hammond Road and often worked from home. He described the children as sometimes noisy in the garden but said that their mother came out to deal with them and never seemed cross.
He described seeing the light on in their house at 4am the week Sara’s body was found and noted that as odd. He never saw anything that “was out of the ordinary or caused concern”.
Evidence was also provided by Lorraine Townson, a schoolteacher at St Mary’s, who said she once noticed a bruise on her face.
In her statement, Hayley Holden, a teaching assistant at St Mary’s, described how she worked with Sara in year 4 and part of year 5 to help her with her spelling. She said she noticed a mark on Sara when class teacher Helen Simmons mentioned it. Ms Holden said she did not feel overly concerned by Sara, noting there were other pupils she was more concerned about in the class.
Evidence from the odontologist and burns surgeon
In a written statement Dr Roland Kouble, a dental surgeon and forensic odontologist said he had analysed four injuries to Sara’s left forearm, one to her left wrist and one to her inner leg/thigh, concluding they were all probable human bite marks.
Dr Kouble was provided dental impressions of Urfan Sharif, Faisal Malik and Sara’s older brother and excluded all three as being responsible. He also said it was not possible the bites had been self- inflicted.
Dr Kouble said it was difficult to age the bites but said the ones on the arm were older than the one on Sara’s inner leg.
Finally, the court heard a written statement from Niall Martin, consultant burns surgeon, who provided a report on the burn injuries seen on Sara’s body.
These included one burn on each buttock that Mr Martin concluded were likely to have been caused in the same incident. It described it as a single contact burn and that it was at least two weeks old.
His view was that it had been intentionally inflicted and made by a domestic iron posssibly and the iron found in the Sharif house.
Mr Martin also identified several burns on Sara’s feet, likely to have been caused by a scold injury, which were likely to have been exacerbated by Sara soiling herself when restrained. He also mentioned evidence of Sara being bound at the feet, which he said was also likely to have been deliberate.
Mr Martin said none of the burns had received proper medical attention.
He concluded that it was “highly likely that the deceased experienced daily pain and suffering prior
to the death”, including “physical discomfort and psychological suffering”, and that Sara would have “hobbled” and “grimaced” or “winced” if the injuries were touched. Mr Martin also said Sara’s suffering would have been obvious to those interacting with her regularly.
