An unemployed conspiracy theorist from Mossley, Tameside has become one of the most familiar faces around courtrooms in Greater Manchester over the past nine months.
Not least as Raja Miah, 49, is usually accompanied at court by a servile group of fellow conspirators whom self-style as The Rabble and whose role appears to be to ’cause chaos’ at their leader’s behest (read more here).
In the past week, Miah has made his seventh and eighth appearances between magistrates’ courts at Tameside and Manchester. Yesterday was ’round six’ in a case in which he is accused of harassing a 40yo female lawyer from the Salford area. He denies the charge (read more here). The hearing was listed to deal with administrative matters ahead of a two day trial in February, 2023.
Last Friday, Miah was the complainant in a matter in which it is alleged that an Oldham businessman and charity organiser, Mohammed Imran Ali, breached a restraining order. A not guilty plea had been entered at an earlier hearing at which he was present in the court building.
The restraining order was part of the sentence that Ali received, along with a fine, in December, 2020 at a controversial hearing where he was found to have harassed Miah by making two posts on Facebook imputing that the latter was in a gay relationship with another well known Oldham businessman, Khazir Rehman.
‘Kaiser’, as he is much better known locally, had refused to support the prosecution, despite he and Miah being long term friends and political associates.
The reporting of the full extent of the controversy has to be reserved until the present case has concluded.
A trial had been listed at 9.30am before a panel of three magistrates at Tameside on 4th November, 2022 to hear allegations that Ali had breached the restraining order, following a chance lunchtime encounter at the entrance to a large supermarket near Oldham town centre. The interaction lasted only a very short time.
When Ali’s legal team arrived at court they had not been served any papers relating to the trial. He was represented by Bradford solicitors, Eldwick Law, and barrister, Fatima Laher of Libertas Chambers.
The Crown Prosecution Service was represented by two junior lawyers who appeared to be ‘shadowing’ one another. The court was told at 9.50am by the CPS that the required case documents had been emailed momentarily to Ms Laher. Whom, by coincidence, started her legal career at the CPS and spent two years as a well regarded prosecutor.
In point of fact, the court later heard that the subject email did not appear until almost four hours had elapsed and was still deficient, in even the most basic terms, of what would be required for the trial to resume.
It also transpired that two police officers, PC Miller and PC Kewley, who were due to give evidence, were not available and no witness statement from either of them had been served on the defendant’s lawyers.
An application by Ms Laher to discontinue proceedings, in all the extant circumstances, was refused by the magistrates and a date was set for a case management hearing on 25th November, 2022 at which a trial date will be listed for early in 2023.
In the event, Raja Miah was not required in the courtroom for this hearing and remained in the room reserved for witnesses throughout.
The press offices at the Crown Prosecution Service, Greater Manchester Police and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service have all been asked to comment on the administrative aspects of the case.
Not least, as the High Court in London recently overturned an adjournment decision by magistrates in Bristol in which circumstances were very similar (read more here).
Page last updated Friday 11th November, 2022 at 0640hrs
Thank you for reading and a polite request: If you wish to make a contribution to the running costs of this website it would be very much appreciated. Donations can made securely, via PayPal at this link.
Corrections: Please let me know if there is a mistake in this article. I will endeavour to correct it as soon as possible.
Right of reply: If you are mentioned in this article and disagree with it, please let me have your comments. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.
© Neil Wilby 2015-2022. Unauthorised use, or reproduction, of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from, and links to, the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby Media, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
One thought on “Familiar face embroiled in more court controversy”