Abortion case against Woking doctor dropped

  • Published
Tulisa ContostavlosImage source, PA
Image caption,
The CPS stated a review of an earlier failed prosecution against singer Tulisa Contostavlos in part prompted the dropping of the abortion drug case

The case against a doctor and a pharmacist accused of illegally supplying an abortion drug has been dropped at Southwark Crown Court.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) offered no evidence against Dr Majeed Ridha and Murtaza Gulamhusein.

Dr Ridha, 65, from Woking, Surrey, had been accused of two counts of encouraging or assisting an offence.

Mr Gulamhusein, 55, from Harrow, north west London, was charged with two offences.

Tulisa trial

The CPS said it had offered no evidence on the case which relied on evidence from Mazher Mahmood, an undercover reporter dubbed "the fake sheikh".

The reporter carried out an undercover investigation for The Sunday Times and wrote an article claiming that the pair had illegally sold abortion drugs.

Mr Mahmood, who is currently suspended from The Sun on Sunday, came under scrutiny earlier this year when the trial of singer Tulisa Contostavlos for alleged involvement in a drug deal collapsed.

Mr Mahmood took part in an undercover "sting" involving Ms Contostavlos. She consistently denied having boasted that she could "sort out" cocaine for him and put him in touch with her rapper friend Mike GLC, who allegedly supplied the Class A drug.

During the trial, judge Alistair McCreath ruled that the case could not go any further because there were "strong grounds to believe" that Mr Mahmood had "lied" at a hearing before the trial started.

The case against Ms Contostavlos and Mike GLC, whose real name is Michael Coombs, was dropped.

Giving its reasons for dropping the case against Dr Ridha and Mr Gulamhusein, the CPS said: "We have a duty under the Code for Crown Prosecutors to keep cases under continuous review.

"These cases were re-reviewed following the conclusion of the case of R v Contostavlos and Coombs on 21 July.

"The outcome of these re-reviews is that there is no longer a realistic prospect of conviction. We have therefore offered no evidence."

Related Internet Links

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.