Roy O’Driscoll

of 19/19
Roy O’Driscoll Macdonna’s Kebab (R v Fazal Karim, Ikram Ul-Haq & Muhammed Tariq)
  • date post

  • Category


  • view

  • download


Embed Size (px)


Roy O’Driscoll. Macdonna’s Kebab (R v Fazal Karim, Ikram Ul-Haq & Muhammed Tariq). Erewash B.C. District LA between Nottingham and Derby No dedicated food safety emergency budget (sampling budget £2000) ‘Unforeseen’ work impacts on the day job / inspections. Information received. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Roy O’Driscoll

  • Roy ODriscoll

    Macdonnas Kebab (R v Fazal Karim, Ikram Ul-Haq & Muhammed Tariq)

  • Erewash B.C. District LA between Nottingham and Derby No dedicated food safety emergency budget (sampling budget 2000)Unforeseen work impacts on the day job / inspections

  • Information received Routine inspection of a pub InformationRear door open - four men preparing meat Investigation into activities commencedAccess was always going to be a problem

  • Police involvement Special Branch request premises informationEHOs not to enter without PoliceVisits conducted but no activityPolice notify EBC they had raided premises No issues highlightedBusiness treated as legitimate

  • Contact with FBOFBOs provided with approval applicationCompleted / signed Registration formAgreed to:

    Cease production / sale Provide traceability for all raw meat Submit approval application

    Subsequent visit conducted BUT, now only one FBORAN served and products detained on site

  • Estimated 4000 kg at premisesRetail receipts provided for 200 kg

  • Preliminary Investigation Relevant LAs contacted, visits conducted Suppliers deny involvement Retail premises - no traceabilityAccess / contact issues Advice sought - FSA food fraud team Eventually FBO 2 contacted - FBO 3 taken overArrangements for possible seizure

  • Preliminary InvestigationFBO 3 meeting arranged - cancelled very ill Advised of warrant process / entry by force Access gained same day as FBO 3 much better!Claimed:

    Only manager FBO 1 and 2 still FBO contacted Not them Ok then must be FBO 4

  • Seizure Unapproved establishment No application for approval received or completed No health / ID marksNo traceability NO FBO! Seize all suspect products

    650 bags Minced fat/sinew (12kg to 15kg bags) 172 x Donner Kebabs 920 kg Mixed Assorted meats (unmarked bags)

  • Regulation 27, not produced, processed & distributed in compliance with Hygiene Regulations - Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 Article 4.

  • 7.5 tonne vehicle is the axel weight

  • In total 10.8 tonnes of meat & meat preparations seized

  • Seizure and disposal Held securely at local cold store JP granted condemnation orderMeat removed for destructionTransportation, storage and disposal costs 2635 EBC Sampling budget = 2000/year Fighting fund application

  • Funding and supportFSA provided:FSA Investigator support - meeting, emails, phone calls and documents Fighting Fund Grant obtained for:All Seizure costs Back filling for investigator timeUrdu Interpreter for interviews under caution and document translationSpecialist Counsel; EC 853/2004 experience

  • Interviews under cautionEvidence to interview 4 people under cautionAll claimed they were not the FBO

    One claimed;Only produced 15 or 30 kebabs as samples Fat / sinew free retail Halal supermarketsNever supplied any Kebabs

    Another admitted; Producing doners in 200, 400, 600 quantity and selling in Nottingham and Derby

    All said they didnt know they had to get approval

  • Why prosecute?Evidence of previous involvement Knew the system, element of fraud Criminal element; FBO 3 - Previous criminal convictions Couldnt attend court as tagged and under curfew! Was the meat fit for human consumption?

    Kebabs allegedly had very high fat / sinew contents 60 - 80%?Gel binder used to stabiliseGel binder supplied to only one other premises FSA approved plant confirmed to be obtaining fat / sinew from retail Halal supermarket

  • Prosecution19 November 2012 three pleaded guilty to offences under Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 (Article 4 (2), 4 (3) and Article 5) at Derby Magistrates Court.

    They admitted:Operating establishment without approval / conditional approval Placing on the market POAO handled in an establishment subject to approval which did not have applied an identification markTotal penalty 6250 (4,500.00 fine and 1750.00 costs)

  • Coming to a place near you?Evidence they had done this beforeAll equipment removed quicklyProfitable win, win scenario

  • Thank you for listening