EXCLUSIVE Racist prison killer, 42, who beat his cellmate to death with a table leg and daubed swastika on the wall with blood is granted parole after serving 23 years behind bars
- Robert Smith, then 20, bludgeoned Zahid Mubarek to death as he slept in 2000
A racist killer who beat his cellmate to death with a table leg and then daubed a swastika on the wall with blood has been granted parole and will be released from prison.
Robert Smith, then 20, sparked national revulsion and a debate about racism in prisons when he bludgeoned Zahid Mubarek, 19, to death as he slept in 2000.
An inquiry found Feltham Young Offenders Institute in west London was ‘institutionally racist’ and at fault for Zahid’s death.
The landmark case was described as the ‘Stephen Lawrence moment’ for the Prison Service and criminal justice system.
Smith, now aged 42, who has served 23 years, had his third parole hearing on 21 June and was told today that the three-person Parole Board panel had recommended that he be released on licence.
Robert Smith, then 20, sparked national revulsion and a debate about racism in prisons when he bludgeoned Zahid Mubarek, 19, to death as he slept in 2000. Smith, now aged 42, who has served 23 years, had his third parole hearing on 21 June and was told today that the three person Parole Board panel had recommended that he be released on licence
An inquiry found Feltham Young Offenders institute in west London was ‘institutionally racist’ and at fault for Zahid’s (pictured) death
The panel said that the former skinhead had successfully completed many accredited programmes to address his use of violence and he had demonstrated a ‘motivation to move away from his previous behaviours and live a pro-social life.’
A summary of the findings, seen by MailOnline, revealed the decision to order Smith’s release was also influenced by ‘the lengthy period of time since Mr Stewart had used any violence towards others…’
The report continued:’Evidence was presented at the hearing and in the dossier regarding Mr Stewart’s progress and custodial conduct since the imposition of his life sentence.
‘He had undertaken accredited programmes to address his use of violence and to learn about and develop victim empathy.
‘He had also completed an extensive amount of other work which had included spending time in a regime designed and supported by psychologists to help people recognise and deal with their problems and the risk they pose to others.’
The landmark case was described as the ‘Stephen Lawrence moment’ for the Prison Service and criminal justice system
The report went on: ‘The panel examined the release plan provided by Mr Stewart’s probation officer and weighed its proposals against assessed risk.
‘The plan included a requirement to reside in designated accommodation as well as strict limitations on Mr Stewart’s contacts, movements and activities.
‘The panel concluded that this plan was robust enough to manage Mr Stewart in the community at this stage because of the evidence he had successfully managed his behaviour without aggression or violence over many years, the extensive work he had undertaken to address and reduce his risk to others, and the involvement of specialist probation officers and other professionals to closely monitor and manage him.’
It decided: ‘After considering the circumstances of his offending, the progress made whilst in custody and the very full evidence presented at the hearing and in the dossier, the panel was satisfied that Mr Stewart’s imprisonment was no longer necessary for the protection of the public.’
The Parole Board underlined the fact that Stewart would be the subject of extensive restrictions when freed, including residing at an agreed address, notifying the authorities of any developing relationships, monitoring, curfews and adhering to ‘exclusion zones’ to ensure he did not meet the family of the victim.
The Parole Board said it had conducted an extensive review of Stewart’s file including ‘the inquiry ordered by the House of Lords in 2006 into the circumstances surrounding the murder.’
A spokesperson for the Parole Board said:’We can confirm that a panel of the Parole Board has directed the release of Robert Stewart following an oral hearing.
‘Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community.’
In January 2000, Zahid was convicted of shoplifting £6 worth of goods from a supermarket and was sentenced to serve 90 days at Feltham YOI (pictured). However, in the early hours of the morning of his scheduled release, he was attacked by Stewart
The decision to release Stewart comes as a surprise as the Parole Board refused to release him – or authorise a move to an open prison – in 2022 as he was still considered a danger to the public.
MailOnline reported in October 2022 that Stewart had a secret hearing under a new surname. He changed the surname in jail, but it is not clear when this happened or if it was legally enacted by deed poll.
READ MORE: EXCLUSIVE: Racist prison killer, 42, is denied parole 22 years after beating his cellmate to death with a table leg and daubing a swastika on the wall in blood
The public report published in 2006 exposed multiple failings that allowed vulnerable Asian teenager Zahid to be in a cell with a known racist.
The Keith Report into Zahid’s death made 88 recommendations. of which the Home Office unequivocally accepted 55.
In January 2000, Zahid was convicted of shoplifting £6 worth of goods from a supermarket and was sentenced to serve 90 days at Feltham YOI.
However, in the early hours of the morning of his scheduled release, he was attacked by Stewart.
Using a broken-off table leg as a deadly weapon, Stewart hit Zahid eleven times, inflicting terrible head injuries on Zahid as he slept.
Zahid died a week later in hospital, on March 21, 2000.
Stewart summoned prison officers and claimed his cellmate had ‘an accident’.
Prison guards reported that when they arrived at Zahid’s cell Stewart had been standing over him covered in blood and holding a large table leg.
He had also written a message on the wall of the cell he was moved to which read ‘just killed me padmate’, signed off with a swastika.
Despite attempting to destroy evidence, he was charged with Zahid’s murder.
Stewart, of Hattersley, Greater Manchester, denied murder.
Passing sentence in November 2000, Mr Justice Grigson told Stewart: ‘As you are a danger to yourself and a danger to the public, custody for life is wholly appropriate.’
Cell 38 of Swallow Unit at Feltham Young Offenders Institution in west London after Smith murdered Zahid in March 2000
Earlier Sir John Nutting QC, for the prosecution, recalled how Stewart had written a series of racist letters to friends before the attack.
In one, he had threatened to resort to killing his cellmate to be transferred to the North West ‘to see some old friends, white ones’.
Asked why he attacked Zahid, Stewart denied the assault was racially motivated, telling the jury: ‘I don’t know, I just felt like it.’
Speaking outside the court, the victim’s father told of the ‘bright future’ his son had had ahead of him and how he had planned to join the army.
Although he expressed his relief at the jury’s verdict, he said he did not feel happy because his son could not be replaced.
READ MORE: The real Fight Club: Former Feltham Young Offender prison guard says staff arrange brutal behind-bars battles in one of Britain’s toughest jails
Zahid’s family, originally from Pakistan, said they felt let down by prison staff who had missed countless opportunities to prevent the tragedy.
His father Mubarek Amin said in 2006: ‘The real tragedy is that my son’s murder could have been avoided if the prison service had done its job properly.
‘My son should never have been put in the same cell as him. Why didn’t the prison service read the 200-odd letters which are not only abusive and racist but predict my son’s murder?’
The public inquiry, which was led by the High Court judge Mr Justice Keith, began in 2004 following an unprecedented decision by the Law Lords.
They ordered the then Home Secretary, David Blunkett, to hold a public inquiry into the murder after lawyers for Zahid’s family argued that the European Convention on Human Rights entitled them to one.
Three weeks after the beginning of his probe, the judge ruled that previous inquiries had established Feltham was ‘institutionally racist’ and that he accepted that conclusion.
The inquiry heard allegations that prison officers set up Gladiator-style fights by placing vulnerable inmates in cells with racist prisoners.
The inquiry was told how prison officials missed 15 chances to save Zahid’s life.
It also revealed how racial incidents were under-reported and that some white officers hurled racial abuse at black inmates.
Mr Justice Keith published his 700-page report in June 2006 outlining a damning indictment of the authorities and described how they had failed to keep Zahid safe.
He named 19 members of the Prison Service whose professional failings played a part in creating the circumstances leading up to the 19-year-old’s death.
The judge also highlighted systematic issues, including racism, Feltham being badly run, lack of information sharing between jails and Stewart even being able to watch the violent Australian neo-Nazi film Romper Stomper.
His recommendations included the ending of enforced cell-sharing and linking the Police National Computer (PNC) to the prison estate to help share security information.
Source: Read Full Article
