A serial offender burgled his neighbours on Birmingham’s Benefits Street and returned minutes later to concoct an extraordinary lie. Harminder Singh broke into a property on James Turner Street in the middle of the night while a family of seven were asleep.
The 44-year-old stole a PlayStation 5, but made a serious mistake by leaving his Nokia phone with the torch on at the scene. Bungling Singh returned to the property claiming his phone had been stolen moments earlier, but when the family realised his ruse they locked him in until the police arrived.
James Turner Street in Winson Green became famous in 2014 when it featured on Channel 4’s ‘Benefits Street’, although neither the defendant nor the victims appeared on the programme. Singh, who lives on the street, admitted the robbery and was jailed for 27 months at Birmingham Crown Court on Wednesday 17 July.
READ MORE: Mom allowed her house on a tree-lined street to be used as a brothel
The occupants and their children were at home and asleep in the early hours of May 14 this year when one of them was awakened by someone moving furniture in the living room. He got up and noticed the front door was open and the PS5 was missing.
The defendant picked up a Nokia phone with the torch on, which did not belong to any member of the family. Prosecutor Maninder Chaggar said: “Five minutes later, the defendant turned up at the address and told the family that two laptops and a mobile phone had been stolen from him.”
She claimed they invited him into the property because they felt sorry for him and added: “He walked straight into the front room and started looking around at the floor where the phone had been found. (The occupant) realised he could well be the burglar.
“He ordered his son to lock the front door and called the police. Within minutes the police arrived. They managed to keep the defendant inside his property.”
Singh was arrested and maintained his lie that two laptops and a Nokia had been stolen from his HMO up the road, when he left them near an open window. He claimed he saw the culprit, in a red hoodie, running away and “assumed” he was black.
The couple he was after were devastated by the loss of the PS5 which they said had cost them £600. Singh had racked up 68 previous convictions for 168 offences across a wide range of crimes, including more than 70 offences similar to theft.
The robbery took place just 18 days after his release from prison. Ragveer Chand, his defence counsel, said Singh had finally promised to change his ways following the recent birth of his first child.
He said: “As a result of becoming a father for the first time, this defendant is determined to put his past behind him. Sometimes such life-changing events can be the catalyst by which people put their past behind them.
“The defendant’s instructions are that, having heard the children crying when he was outside the address, he simply could not live with the consequences of depriving them of the PS5. There may be a degree of scepticism because the court knows he has not recovered.”
He confirmed that Singh had quickly disposed of the console. The lawyer had originally requested an adjournment to allow an assessment of whether the defendant was suitable for a drug rehabilitation programme.
But Judge Avik Mukherjee refused to do so on the grounds that Singh had not previously sought assistance from probation services, had breached 24 court orders and had burgled the house shortly after leaving prison. He also found that the incident was so serious that only imprisonment was justified and that Singh did not currently show any prospect of rehabilitation.
Judge Mukherjee said: “This is your first offence of burglary. It is a significant change in your offending behaviour and in a negative way. This is an escalation of offending.”
He said the PS5 was a “significant loss” for the family, adding: “I am satisfied that he has returned to retrieve evidence that may implicate him in this offence.”
Judge Mukherjee concluded that he hoped it was true that Singh had decided to change his ways after the birth of his son, but also raised some doubts: “His partner must have been pregnant in March, April and May, which did not prevent her from realising that this was a life she had to leave behind for her newborn son.
“However, if that’s something that’s going to convince you that this is a path that needs to come to an end, that bodes well for the future.”
