The father of Sara Sharif was awarded custody of the schoolgirl despite being accused of abusing her siblings and mother for years, it has emerged.
The trial of Urfan Sharif, 43, revealed how Surrey county council children’s services, Surrey police and Sara’s primary school were aware of concerns about the family for 16 years.
During the period of abuse and torture leading up to her death, Sharif twice said he would homeschool his daughter, and on Thursday ministers pledged stronger safeguards for children being taken into home education.
The leader of the Commons, Lucy Powell, told MPs: “We are committed to further reform of children’s social care and much stronger safeguards for children being taken into home education. This is long overdue, and further details will be announced imminently.”
The full extent of the authorities’ involvement in Sara’s short life can be revealed following an application by the Guardian and other media to publish information from family court documents.
They show that children in the family were bitten, burned and beaten and neglected. The abuse foreshadowed the assaults on Sara, who was bitten, burned and beaten to death by her father and stepmother, Beinash Batool, less than four years after a family court awarded the couple custody.
Sharif, 43, and Batool, 30, were convicted of the 10-year-old’s murder on Wednesday after an eight-week trial at the Old Bailey.
Sara was made the subject of a child protection plan as soon as she was born in January 2013 because of concerns that she was at risk of harm from her father, Urfan Sharif, and mother Olga Domin, who has suspected learning difficulties.
The family was known to social services and police even before Sara’s birth. Police were involved four times between May 2010 and August 2012, and Surrey county council children’s services were in contact from 2010.
Concerns had been raised about inadequate supervision of Sara’s siblings and poor, dirty conditions in the family home. The children were said to have “suffered from emotional abuse resulting from the volatile relationship between the parents”. On one occasion in October 2012, one child, referred to as Z for legal reasons, suffered physical harm during an altercation.
The same sibling was also found alone in a shop aged three. A year later, Z was found unsupervised in Woking town centre.
In an application for a care order in December 2012, the family were noted as living in temporary homeless accommodation in Slough. It was added that the family had lived previously in a one-bed rented flat where the parents and children shared a bed. The rest of the house was not well-furnished and the children had limited age-appropriate toys, the documents show.
The local authority brought care proceedings for the children seven days before Sara was born. A case summary noted: “There have also been allegations that the children have been subject to physical abuse by both parents. The children have been exposed to domestic violence.”
But on 17 January 2013, six days after Sara’s birth, the first hearing for care proceedings for the children concluded: “Whilst the guardian is satisfied that there may be reasonable grounds to believe that the children are likely to suffer significant harm … The advantages of the children remaining at home should [be] weighed against the potential harm to the children of removal, particularly to Sara as a newborn child, before we have a full assessment and understanding of these children and their parents ability to meet their individual needs.”
Months later, in May 2013, Sara’s sibling Z was burned by an iron. When social workers visited their home, they found no lightbulbs or bedding in the children’s bedrooms.
In September that year, it was agreed that the children should remain in the care of their parents. Sharif and Domin signed an agreement with social workers that they would “fully engage” in a 10-week parenting course and “not to use any physical chastisement on any of the children”.
They were also to ensure that the children could not access the front door and get outside of the property without adult supervision. The children were placed under a 12-month supervision order.
Sara was taken into foster care for the first time for a short period in November 2014, when she was almost two, after Z complained that Domin had bitten them “hard”.
At a hearing for an emergency protection order for the three children that month, it was reported that Z was “distressed” and “shaking” when they were being picked up by Domin. The child said: “‘I don’t want to go home, mummy hits.” The previous day Z was observed telling another sibling, known as U for legal reasons, that “the man is going to hit us now” and “stop or the man will hit you”.
The transcript from the hearing reveals that Sara, who was in a separate placement, was “observed to stand facing a wall”. Social workers described her as “very small” and reported that she “doesn’t eat a lot” and “doesn’t respond to being carried, doesn’t wrap her legs around her carer”.
The lawyer for Surrey council argued: “These updates from the foster carers [and] further disclosure, increase concern that this is not a one-off incident.” They added that in previous proceedings, allegations had been made that Sharif had hit one of the children in 2011 and 2012.
In an application for the emergency protection order in November 2014, a social worker noted: “There would be significant concerns if the children returned to the independent care of Mr Sharif given the history of allegations of physical abuse of the children and domestic abuse with Mr Sharif as the perpetrator.
“No assessment has been carried out of Mr Sharif as a single primary however a parenting assessment of parents in the last court proceedings did raise concerns about Mr Sharif’s parenting capacity.”
Sara and her sibling U were returned to the parents but Z remained in foster care. While there, Z made allegations of physical abuse perpetrated by both parents, as well as allegations of domestic violence. The allegations were denied by Sharif and Domin and the court did not determine the truth.
In 2015, in the middle of the care proceedings hearing, Domin accused Sharif of hitting her and their children, and of controlling and violent behaviour. These allegations were never tested in court but Sharif agreed go on a domestic violence course. He also made counter-allegations against Domin.
Sara was briefly taken into foster care before joining her mother in a refuge. While in foster care, a carer noted that both Sara and a sibling had scars potentially consistent with cigarette burns, which Domin and Sharif said were chicken pox scars. Sara was also observed “to have some disturbed behaviour”.
Despite all this, in November that year, the family court concluded that the children should live with Domin and have supervised visits with Sharif.
But in March 2019, the children began living with Sharif and his wife Batool full-time. Sharif claimed this happened because Sara told him she was being abused by Domin.
The documents say: “The child, Sara, reported that her mother had slapped her and pulled her hair. The child, Sara, reported that her mother had tried to drown her when taking a bath. Sara also reported that her mother had tried to burn her with a lighter and had pinched her.” The allegations were not tested in court.
In May, Sharif and Batool applied, with Domin’s consent, for Sara and her sibling to live with them. In an report ordered by the family court on Sara’s welfare, the council recorded that Sara had disclosed physical assaults by Domin, and concluded that the mother had a low capacity to meet Sara’s needs.
It recommended that Sara should live with Sharif and Batool and have supervised contact once a fortnight with Domin.
A judge agreed with this report and granted Sharif and Batool custody, with Batool supervising the visits. At a hearing at Guildford family court on 9 October 2019, the judge praised Batool, saying it was “amazing” she could supervise the visits.
Batool told the judge that Domin’s children hated their mother and called her “Shrek” and “ogre”. The judge told Domin: “It would be good if you could at least be courteous to her [Batool], be polite to her, be slightly grateful even to her because … without her, I don’t know how we’re going to get this contact keeping going to be honest.”
Five months later, Batool messaged her her sister to say that Sharif was beating the children. She went on to tell her sister repeatedly that Sharif had “beat the crap out of Sara” and sent her pictures of the schoolgirl’s injuries.
Less than four years later, Sara was dead.
Lucy Powell, the Commons leader, said the government would be “imminently” announcing details of “stronger safeguards for children being taken into home education” as she paid tribute to the murdered 10-year-old.
During business questions, she told MPs: “Can I start first of all by saying how appalled I am, and I am sure the whole house is, on the details that have emerged in the murder of Sara Sharif.
“And can I say on behalf of the government that nothing is more important than keeping children safe. We are committed to further reform of children’s social care and much stronger safeguards for children being taken into home education.
“This is long overdue, and further details will be announced imminently.”
