
Boy's sentence for killing 80-year-old Bhim Kohli to be reviewed
He died the next day with a spinal cord injury and fractured ribs.
Last month, Mr Justice Turner sentenced a boy, aged 15, who punched and kicked Mr Kohli, to seven years in custody, and a 13-year-old girl, who encouraged the attack by filming parts of it while laughing, to a three-year youth rehabilitation order.
Both children, who cannot be named because of their age, denied their crimes but were convicted by a jury at Leicester Crown Court.
A spokesperson for the Attorney General's Office said the case will be reviewed under the unduly lenient sentence scheme.
The spokesperson said in a statement: 'The Solicitor General, Lucy Rigby KC MP, was appalled by this violent, cowardly attack on an innocent man.
'She wishes to express her deepest sympathies to Bhim Kohli's friends and family at this difficult time.
'After undertaking a detailed review of the case, the Solicitor General concluded the sentence of the 15-year-old boy could be referred to the Court of Appeal.
'The court will determine if the sentence is increased or not.'
Mr Kohli's daughter spoke of feeling 'angry and disappointed', adding that she believes their sentences do not 'reflect the severity of the crime they committed'.
In a statement after the sentencing hearing, Susan Kohli said: 'When they are released, they still have their full lives ahead of them. They can rebuild their lives. We can't.'
Mid Leicestershire MP Peter Bedford and the MP for South Leicestershire, Alberto Costa, wrote to the AGO last month asking for the sentences to be reviewed.
It is understood the sentence of the 13-year-old girl will not be referred to the Court of Appeal as the threshold had not been met.
A six-week trial heard that Mr Kohli's children found him lying on the ground in agony when he told his daughter that he had been called a 'P***' during the attack.
The boy said in his evidence he had a 'tussle' with Mr Kohli over his slider shoe before he slapped the elderly man with it out of 'instinct', which caused the pensioner to fall to his knees, but denied kicking or punching him.
In a letter written by the boy to a woman who had worked with him at the residential unit where he was being looked after, he wrote: 'I f****** hate what I did. I regret it so much.
'I have flashbacks of that day and it just upsets me. I kinda just needed anger etc releasing.'
The girl had filmed a series of video clips in which the elderly man was hit with the shoe by the balaclava-clad boy and another where Mr Kohli lay motionless on the ground.
She was heard laughing in the video clips which she kept in a passcode protected Snapchat folder.
In his sentencing remarks last month, Mr Justice Turner said: 'I am sure Mr Kohli did nothing at all to deserve what you did. What you did was wicked.
'You made a cowardly and violent attack on an elderly man.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mirror
44 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Paedophile offered gran £300 to let him abuse baby girl in sickening messages
WARNING: DISTRESSING CONTENT. A paedophile has been jailed after boasting to a woman he met on a dating app about the alleged abuse he had carried out against children A depraved paedophile who offered a woman £300 to let him sexually assault her baby granddaughter has been jailed for four years after she took screenshots of his vile messages and alerted the police. Craig Binns, 31, met the woman on a dating website less than three weeks prior to the messages, where he "bragged" that he had previously paid other people to let him rape their children, including £1,000 to violate a two-year-old girl, Newcastle Crown Court heard in May. The horrified woman gave the screenshots to the police, leading to his arrest. Binns, of Cross Avenue in Wallsend, admitted to three offences in court including attempting to pay for the sexual services of a child and arranging the commission of a child sex offence. Binns and the woman exchanged messages for a few weeks before eventually meeting in November, where he took her for a drive in his car, prosecutor Claire Anderson said. The woman was completely unaware of Binns' horrifying motives. Days later the pervert, who told the woman his surname was Dudgeon, talked about staying in her home and suggested the couple have a threesome with a child, the court heard. He also questioned the woman on whether she had thought about having "sex with people aged from one onwards", Ms Anderson said. When he discovered she had a 10-week-old granddaughter, Binns asked for naked pictures of the child which he offered to pay for, the court heard. The dad-of-two also asked the woman if she had sexually touched the baby and if he could be left alone with the girl. The woman took screenshots of the Snapchat conversations which she sent to police but, fearing the risk he posed to children, continued messaging him to get more information about him, Ms Anderson said. He repeatedly offered her money to let him sexually abuse the baby, including £300 in cash for a graphic sex act, the court heard. Ms Anderson said Binns "bragged" about abusing other youths and said he had paid parents to let him "rape" their children, including a seven-year-old girl and a two-year-old girl he claimed he 'gave' £1,000 for. During the trial, the court heard there was no evidence he had ever actually carried out the abuse he boasted about. A search of his devices found he had registered his internet account under a false name and had made horrifying searches relating to families having sex. Binns initially denied all wrongdoing, telling police that the Snapchat messages weren't real. But he soon admitted everything, the court heard. Judge Edward Bindloss said Binns was trying to groom the woman and make her an "accomplice" in his abuse of children. But the woman "did the right thing" and went immediately to police, who also acted quickly to arrest Binns, the judge said, adding he commended both her and the officers for "their prompt actions". Judge Bindloss said had the woman not acted so bravely, he was "entirely convinced" Binns would have abused the child. He said Binns posed a "high risk" to children and would have to abide by a sexual harm prevention order and sign the sex offenders register for life.


South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Met Police issue warning after Palestine Action ban comes into force
The force said there are a number of events taking place in London this weekend and 'anyone attending should be aware that officers policing these will act where criminal offences, including those related to support of proscribed groups or organisations, are committed'. Palestine Action lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge on Friday, which sought to stop the protest group being banned, less than two hours before the new legislation came into force at midnight. The designation as a terror group means that membership of, or support for, Palestine Action is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. It comes as a group said it is set to gather in Parliament Square on Saturday holding signs supporting Palestine Action, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries. Proscription makes it a criminal offence under the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT) to invite or express support for an organisation through chanting, wearing clothing or displaying articles such as flags, signs or logos, the Met said. The Met also said it is a criminal offence to: – belong, or profess to belong, to a proscribed organisation in the UK or overseas (Section 11 TACT); – invite support for a proscribed organisation (Section 12(1A) TACT); – express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation (Section 12(1A) TACT); – arrange, manage or assist in arranging or managing a meeting in the knowledge that the meeting is to support or further the activities of a proscribed organisation, or is to be addressed by a person who belongs or professes to (Section 12(2) TACT); – wear clothing or carry or display articles in public in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that the individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation (Section 13 TACT); – publish an image of an item of clothing or other article, such as a flag or logo, in the same circumstances (Section 13(1A) TACT)

Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Met Police issue warning after Palestine Action ban comes into force
The force said there are a number of events taking place in London this weekend and 'anyone attending should be aware that officers policing these will act where criminal offences, including those related to support of proscribed groups or organisations, are committed'. Palestine Action lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge on Friday, which sought to stop the protest group being banned, less than two hours before the new legislation came into force at midnight. The designation as a terror group means that membership of, or support for, Palestine Action is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. It comes as a group said it is set to gather in Parliament Square on Saturday holding signs supporting Palestine Action, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries. Proscription makes it a criminal offence under the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT) to invite or express support for an organisation through chanting, wearing clothing or displaying articles such as flags, signs or logos, the Met said. The Met also said it is a criminal offence to: – belong, or profess to belong, to a proscribed organisation in the UK or overseas (Section 11 TACT); – invite support for a proscribed organisation (Section 12(1A) TACT); – express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation (Section 12(1A) TACT); – arrange, manage or assist in arranging or managing a meeting in the knowledge that the meeting is to support or further the activities of a proscribed organisation, or is to be addressed by a person who belongs or professes to (Section 12(2) TACT); – wear clothing or carry or display articles in public in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that the individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation (Section 13 TACT); – publish an image of an item of clothing or other article, such as a flag or logo, in the same circumstances (Section 13(1A) TACT)