Moment thief disguised as Foot Locker worker drags wheelie bin packed with £3,000 of stolen clothes and trainers away
Reece Wheat, 28, disguised himself in the firm's distinctive black and white striped uniform before he rushed away with thousands of pounds worth of goods.
He was aided, by accomplice, Ellis Bishop, 30, who helped him break in and haul away the stolen loot on Clumber Street in Nottingham on May 13, this year.
Shocking CCTV cameras caught the shameless duo pushing the stolen items along the street packed in two wheelie bins, which had been nabbed from a nearby bar.
The hooded crook was also captured helping Wheat to break in before bundling the stolen items into the wheelie bins waiting outside.
Later that day, Wheat was arrested after being spotted near the Footlocker store boldly wearing some of pinched Nike clothing.
It was later found that the serial thief had also broken into a bike shed in Station Street, and had also shoplifted £30 worth of washing capsules from Savers.
Now Wheat has been jailed for nine months, while Bishop was given a 26-week prison sentence after pleading guilty at Nottingham Magistrates' Court.
Detectives found the accomplice was also responsible for three other shop thefts in the city centre on May, 27 June 15 and June 20.
Bishop of Nottingham, was charged with burglary and four counts of shop theft, including the theft of the bins.
PC Ben King, of Nottinghamshire Police's city centre neighbourhood policing team, said: 'Thousands of pounds worth of stock was stolen during this break-in, before being paraded through the city centre in a pair of wheelie bins.
'Ellis Bishop played a leading role in this brazen burglary by taking the bins from a neighbouring shop and then helping Reece Wheat fill them with stolen trainers and clothes.
'Unlike his accomplice, he didn't leave forensic evidence at the scene, so identifying him was a bit trickier.
'After extensively reviewing the footage available, however, we were able to link him to his offending by the tattoos he had on show and the trainers on his feet.
'Retail crime can have a real impact on businesses and the staff that work there, so we're pleased to have now locked up both the people responsible for this burglary.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
35 minutes ago
- Times
Fraud suspects will ‘lose their right to a jury trial'
Defendants charged with fraud and some sexual offences are expected to be among those who will lose their automatic right to a jury trial under the biggest shake-up of the criminal courts in a generation. Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, is said to be considering proposals for fraud cases to be heard by a specialist judge rather than a jury. This is because fraud cases often relate to complex financial information. It is designed to significantly speed up fraud trials, which clog up crown courts given the extra time needed for the prosecution and defence teams to prepare and present their evidence in a way that ordinary members of the public can understand. Fraud cases make up only 1,183 of the 76,957 cases in the crown court backlog or 1.6 per cent but take considerably longer than average trials given their complexity. Under the plans, fraud cases would be heard in a new intermediate court structure in between the magistrates court, which can only hand down sentences of up to 12 months, and the crown court with a jury. The creation of an intermediate court is expected to be recommended in a review of the crisis in crown courts to be published by Sir Brian Leveson, a former appeal judge and head of criminal justice, next week. Cases would be tried by a judge and two magistrates rather than a jury. These would be cases that are too serious for magistrates courts but are no longer deemed serious enough for the crown court in front of a jury. They would no longer be 'either way cases' in which the defendant is able to opt for their case to be heard by a jury in the crown court. The proposals are likely to cause concerns over the threat to Britain's centuries-old principle of jury trials. The establishment of an intermediate court was a key recommendation by The Times Crime and Justice Commission earlier this year. Mahmood is expected to accept this key recommendation in order to significantly reduce the time and cost of a trial, deliver swifter justice to victims and cut the crown courts' record backlog. However, she will not announce which offences will no longer be tried at a crown court until the autumn. Government sources said fraud cases and some sexual offences are likely to be moved to the intermediate court. There are 12,532 sexual offences in the crown courts' backlog. • Criminals will be released early under 'digital prison' plan A government source said: 'It will be for Sir Brian to recommend on the issue, but there is a strong case for fraud trials without juries. They are often related to complex financial information, and so may be better heard by a specialist judge alone. They would be dealt with more quickly that way, which would help reduce the courts backlog that soared under the last government.' There are a large number of cases that can be tried either way and ministers are understood to be planning for most of these offences to be heard in the intermediate court. The Times previously revealed that defendants accused of violent crimes and drug dealing will also be among those to lose their automatic right to a jury. However, the plans to remove fraud and other cases away from jury trials have already faced a backlash from senior legal figures and there are concerns of a fresh battle with barristers, who staged a series of strikes in 2022, which significantly harmed efforts to reduce the courts backlog. Jonathan Fisher KC, who conducted a Home Office-commissioned independent review of the conduct of serious fraud prosecutions, said: 'I do not think the case for abolishing juries in serious fraud trials has been made out.' Fisher pointed out that concerns around complex fraud cases related to disclosure 'where the prosecution has been overwhelmed by the handling of colossal volumes of digitally held unused material resulting in unnecessary and protracted court hearings'. Fisher noted that the recommendations made in his review would 'streamline the process and save considerable court time and resources' without having to move those cases to an intermediate Mills KC, the head of the Bar Council, said that 'changing the fundamental structure of delivering criminal justice' was not 'a principled response' to the backlog in the crown courts. • Courts without juries 'could bring swifter justice' Mills, who leads the professional body for more than 18,000 practising barristers in England and Wales, noted that backlogs were not limited to the crown court and that 300,000 cases were queuing in magistrates' courts. 'Anything that is put forward as a solution needs to take a whole system approach especially in terms of the available resources, so it doesn't simply reshuffle the problem,' Mills said. Mary Prior KC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association, criticised the government for failing to consult it. She said: 'As at the beginning of July we have no real understanding of precisely what is going to be suggested.' There are also concerns that crown courts are not making full use of their sitting days, which is holding back efforts to clear the backlog. Earlier this year Mahmood announced funding for a record 110,000 collective sitting days over this financial year. • Violent crime suspects may lose right to jury to clear court backlog Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, said: 'Before the government decides to rip up our constitutional settlement, they should start by getting the basics right, including getting courts sitting round the clock.' The changes will be introduced alongside the overhaul of sentencing laws, which will effectively scrap prison sentences of less than 12 months except in certain circumstances. Mahmood will formally introduce these changes in a Sentencing Bill next week. The Ministry of Justice said: 'We know that justice delayed is justice denied … That's why we're backing our courts with record funding and have asked Sir Brian Leveson to recommend once-in-a-generation reform to tackle delays and speed up justice for victims.' You can read the commission's full report below or here
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Man accused of assaulting police at airport ‘headbutted traveller'
A man accused of assault police at Manchester Airport also head-butted a traveller, a court has heard. Mohammed Fahir Amaaz, 20 allegedly got 'in the face' of traveller Abdulkareem Ismaeil and head-butted him in a Starbucks at Terminal Two before police were called, Liverpool Crown Court was told on Friday. Police traced Amaaz and his brother, Muhammad Amaad, 26, who were leaving the airport after picking up their mother from a flight from Qatar. It was alleged that the brothers used a 'high level of violence' and assaulted three officers who arrived to arrest them as they paid for parking. Jurors were shown CCTV. The brothers have denied the charges against them from 23 July last year. Mr Ismaeli had been on the same flight as the defendant's mother where 'something happened' which upset her, the jury heard. He had been with his wife, two young daughters and young son in Starbucks while leaving the terminal when the defendant's mother passed by and pointed him out to her sons. The manager of the Starbucks, Cameron Carledge, overheard 'raised voices' while doing paperwork in his office, when he went to the door and saw his colleague prepared the order for Mr Ismaeil at the counter. He saw another man, wearing a blue track-suit, identified as Amaaz, 'quite close to him, shouting at him'. Mr Carledge said the shouting was in a foreign language he did not understand. 'At the time of the arguing he was very close to him, like in his face,' the witness said. 'Blue track-suit man seemed quite aggressive, obviously annoyed about something, I don't know what. Blue track-suit man was aggressively shouting. 'Because his body language, his tone of voice was quite aggressive.' Mr Carledge continued that Mr Ismaeili raised his voice in a more defensive than aggressive way. 'There was arguing, I don't know what was being said, then blue track-suit man head butted the man we see in the black,' he continued. 'He got him in the face. It did not look like it hurt Mr Ismaeil much but it was forceful enough to make him stagger back into the counter.' The Starbucks manager said that before the two men were spit up, Amaaz threw two punches but he thought they landed on Mr Ismaeil's shoulder. He then called the police. Mr Carledge said, working at the airport, he saw people 'arguing all the time' but, after witnessing the headbutt, called police. Amaaz denies one count of assault to Mr Ismaeli and three counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm to PC Zachary Marsden, PC Ellie Cook and PC Lydia Ward. His brother Amaad denies one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm to PC Marsden.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Palestine Action to be banned as terrorist organisation at midnight – after losing late legal challenge
Palestine Action will be banned as a terrorist group after losing a legal challenge less than two hours before the law comes into force. MPs overwhelmingly voted in favour of Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the protest group under the Terrorism Act 2000 and Lords have backed the move. The law change, which adds Palestine Action to the list of banned organisations along with the likes of al Qaeda, ISIS and Hezbollah, will come into force at midnight. It makes membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, while even wearing a T-shirt or badge with the group's name on attracts a maximum six-month sentence. Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action after two Voyager aircraft were allegedly damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on 20 June, which police said caused around £7m worth of damage. But the High Court heard the decision had been taken before the incident and as early as March this year. Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, is seeking to bring a legal challenge against the Home Office with a hearing for permission to bring a judicial review set to take place during the week of 21 July. Her lawyers applied for "interim relief" on Friday to temporarily block the legislation from coming into force until that hearing, arguing the Irish author Sally Rooney, who wrote Normal People, was among supporters who fear the "ramifications". But Mr Justice Chamberlain refused the application, saying: "I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force." He refused permission to appeal but lawyers representing Ms Ammori applied directly to the Court of Appeal for a rare urgent hearing to challenge the decision. Three judges, including the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, refused permission to appeal in a ruling less than two hours before the ban was due to come into force. Around two hundred protestors earlier gathered outside court in support of the group, with some banging drums, waving Palestinian flags, wearing the keffiyeh scarf or holding placards and signs. Counter-protesters also arrived amid a heavy police presence. Raza Husain KC - one of 13 barristers inside a courtroom packed with journalists and members of the public - said his client Ms Ammori was inspired by the "long tradition" of direct action in the UK from suffragettes and activists protesting against apartheid and the Iraq war. "This is the first time in our history a direct action, civil disobedience group which does not advocate violence has sought to be proscribed as terrorists," he said. "We ask you to suspend, in the first instance until 21 July, what we say is an ill-considered, discriminatory, authoritarian abuse of statutory power that is alien to the basic tradition of common law and contrary to the Human Rights Act." Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, said, along with the hundreds of T-shirts in circulation, the red boiler suits associated with the group and even kaffiyehs could "arouse suspicion of membership". She said the ban would have a "chilling effect" on protest and free speech, criminalising "a huge range of behaviour", and having "severe and far reaching" consequences capable of impacting "vast numbers" of people across the UK and further afield. But Ben Watson KC, representing the government, said former members would still be free to express their views, and would not be treated any differently even if their protests involved direct action which is criminal. He argued a temporary block would be a "serious disfigurement of the statutory regime" and Palestine Action could challenge the home secretary's decision at a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. "The serious issue to be tried is met in full by the adequate alternative remedy that parliament has provided," he said. "Even if the court does conclude that there is some residual scope for judicial review… then we respectfully submit that the court needs to look at the bespoke regime that parliament has provided."
