Sara Sharif’s father and stepmother have been found guilty of her murder, as questions are now raised over missed opportunities to save the 10-year-old.
Sara suffered a “daily living hell” as she was slowly tortured to death over many months by Urfan Sharif, who was described in court as a psychopath and a “controlling, violent bully”.
The 43-year-old was convicted of murder at the Old Bailey on Wednesday after an eight-week trial. His wife, Beinash Batool, 30, was also found guilty of murder. His brother, Faisal Malik, 29, was found guilty of causing or allowing Sara’s death.
Sharif held his head in his hands and Batool wept as the verdicts were delivered after about two days of jury deliberations.
The judge, Mr Justice Cavanagh, adjourned sentencing until next Tuesday, telling jurors the case had been “extremely stressful and traumatic”.
He said: “I know a murder trial is always stressful and traumatic but this case almost above any other has been extremely stressful and traumatic. You have performed your duty magnificently. I’m acutely aware the evidence you had to sit through has been very distressing and you wouldn’t be human if you didn’t find it upsetting.”
Sara’s mother, Olga Domin, paid tribute to her daughter, saying: “My dear Sara, I ask God to please take care of my little girl, she was taken too soon. Sara had beautiful brown eyes and an angelic voice. Sara’s smile could brighten up the darkest room. Everyone who knew Sara will know her unique character, her beautiful smile and loud laugh.
“She will always be in our hearts, her laughter will bring warmth to our lives. We miss Sara very much. Love you princess.”
Sara was found dead in a bunk bed at the family home in Surrey on 10 August 2023. Sharif had killed her two days earlier and fled to Pakistan, from where he called police to say he had beaten her up “too much” for being naughty. He had left a handwritten “confession” near her fully clothed body, saying: “I swear to God that my intention was not to kill her. But I lost it.”
A postmortem found Sara had 71 external injuries, including bruises, burns and human bite marks. She also had at least 25 fractures, including 11 to her spine.
Sharif, a taxi driver, lied repeatedly to the jury for six days as he denied assaulting Sara. But on the seventh day of his evidence he dramatically told jurors he took “full responsibility” for her death.
He admitted binding Sara with packing tape and beating her with a cricket bat, metal pole and mobile phone. He denied biting her, putting her in a homemade hood and burning her with an iron and boiling water. Batool, who had refused to provide her dental impressions, did not give evidence during the trial.
The prosecutor, William Emlyn Jones KC, told jurors that Sharif fostered a “culture of violent discipline where assaults of Sara had become completely routine, completely normalised”. He said the schoolgirl was “brutally mistreated, abused and violently assaulted” for years.
Serious questions will now be raised as to how Sharif’s abuse went undetected for so long, given the family had repeatedly attracted the attention of social services, police and schools over a period of 16 years.
The case will be the focus of a local safeguarding review to examine potential missed opportunities and whether more could have been done to prevent the death of Sara, who was home schooled from April 2023.
Caroline Carberry KC, Batool’s barrister, described Sharif as a “manipulative, serial abuser of vulnerable women” and an “abuser of children … over many years as confirmed in police and social service records”.
The trial heard that Sharif had previously been arrested on suspicion of assaulting Sara’s siblings when one was a baby and another was a child. He had also been arrested on suspicion of abusing three unconnected Polish women, including Sara’s mother, Olga Domin, with the first claim dating back to 2007.
In each of those three cases, Surrey police said, an investigation was carried out but there was insufficient evidence to proceed and Sharif was released without charge.
Sara was placed in the care of her father after a custody hearing at Guildford family court in 2019 despite concerns for years about the potential risk he posed.
DCS Mark Chapman, of Surrey police, told the Guardian that the force’s contact with the family “goes back some years”. He said details of the contact were “properly referred into the custody family court hearing around [the] placement of Sara”. He said there had been no further contact with Surrey police after that.
Surrey county council is understood to have supported Sara’s return to her father in 2019 because that had been her preference.
Libby Clark, a specialist prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service, said she believed Sharif’s willingness to go on parenting and domestic violence courses was likely to have helped his custody case.
She said: “He’s quite a clever man and I know the extent to which he went on those courses … to be a better parent. Undoubtedly going on those courses was part of the ongoing proceedings, but he knew how to behave on them. I think he was clever enough to be able to give the right answers.”
Sophie Francis-Cansfield, the head of policy at the charity Women’s Aid, said the case highlighted “a devastating failure” to safeguard children at risk.
She said: “Sara Sharif’s story is a devastating reminder of the consequences when red flags are ignored and children’s safety is not prioritised in family court decisions. Before Sara was even born, there were alarming warning signs.
“Her father had been accused of abuse by three women, and Sara was placed under a child protection plan at birth – clear evidence of significant risk. Yet, despite multiple signs of ongoing harm, the system failed to act decisively. Instead of ensuring her safety, family courts prioritised reunification at the expense of her life.”
Surrey police said they were working with other agencies on progressing the safeguarding review. A spokesperson said: “No child should ever have to endure the brutal mistreatment, the appalling injuries and the extreme abuse that Sara was subjected to. We remain committed to working with our partner agencies to identify the lessons to be learned from this case and ensure these are swiftly acted upon.”
Rachael Wardell from Surrey county council said Sara’s death was “incredibly distressing”.
She said: “The focus of the trial has been on the evidence needed to secure the convictions of those responsible for Sara’s death. This means that until the independent safeguarding review concludes, a complete picture cannot be understood or commented upon.
“What is clear from the evidence we’ve heard in court is that the perpetrators went to extreme lengths to conceal the truth from everyone. We are resolute in our commitment to protecting children, and we are determined to play a full and active part in the forthcoming review alongside partner agencies, to thoroughly understand the wider circumstances surrounding Sara’s tragic death.”
Rachel de Souza, the children’s commissioner for England, said schools should be made the fourth statutory safeguarding partners with the police, social care and health services. “We need proper oversight of children being educated at home, through the long-promised register of children not in school and by requiring councils to sign off on home educating requests for some of the most vulnerable children,” she said.
“There can be no doubt that Sara was failed in the starkest terms by the safety net of services around her. Even before she was born, she was known to social care – and yet she fell off their radar so entirely that by the time she died, she was invisible to them all. We can have no more reviews, no more strategies, no more debate. When we say ‘never again’, we have to mean it – let that be Sara’s legacy.”
