Murdered Sara Sharif failed by system that missed opportunities to save her

Murdered 10-year-old Sara Sharif was “failed by the safeguarding system” in multiple ways throughout her short life, according to a review which said her father’s domestic abuse had been overlooked and underestimated.

The report into numerous missed opportunities concluded that while a “great deal of information” was available to various authorities, even safeguarding professionals appeared to have been “groomed and manipulated” by her killer father, Urfan Sharif.

Sara, who was found dead in a bunk-bed at the family home in Woking, Surrey, in August 2023, suffered what was described as “horrific abuse” at the hands of Sharif and her stepmother, Beinash Batool.

Sharif and Batool were jailed for life with minimum terms of 40 years and 33 years respectively in December last year, after being found guilty of her murder.

Sara’s uncle, Faisal Malik, was found guilty of causing or allowing her death and jailed for 16 years.

Their trial heard how Sharif had repeated contact with Surrey social services  before he was charged with murdering his daughter.

The review into the handling of Sara’s care by various different services including police, health, social care and education, said she had been “a victim of domestic abuse from birth onwards”.

While she was described as a “beautiful little girl, full of personality with a lovely smile”, her “reality was day to day abuse which became normalised”, persuaded by her father and stepmother “that she deserved the treatment being meted out to her”, the report said.

Known as a local child safeguarding practice review, the report described the little girl’s family life as “complicated” and stated that those convicted over her death were “ultimately responsible”.

But the 62-page review, published on Thursday, said there were “many points at which different action could, and we suggest, should, have been taken” and that Sara “was not protected from abuse and torture”.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said the review “rightly highlights the glaring failures and missed opportunities across all agencies which led to Sara’s death” while a spokesman for Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the case was “all the more heartbreaking” because of the “serious failings that contributed to her death”.

Surrey County Council said it was “deeply sorry” and insisted it has taken “robust action to address” failings and will continue to work to implement all of the review’s recommendations.

The seriousness and significance of Urfan Sharif’s domestic abuse was “overlooked, not acted on and underestimated by almost all professionals” involved with Sara and her family, the report said.

Sara was placed on a child protection plan before she was even born, and family court hearings followed, with the council beginning proceedings to have her taken into care soon after her birth.

In her short life, she moved from the care of both parents, to living with her mother, Olga, and having only supervised contact with her father after his domestic abuse.

But, in 2019, after Sharif alleged Sara had been abused in her birth mother’s care, she was placed with her father and stepmother – a pair the review described as a “lethal combination” who “should never have been trusted” to look after her.

The review noted that text messages between Batool and her sisters, discovered during the police investigation, showed Sara had begun being assaulted by her father “soon after she moved in with him”.

The report said the “overall process” of court proceedings, when it was agreed Sara should live with her father and stepmother, had not maintained “sufficient focus” on Sara’s needs, cultural heritage and the ability of Sharif and Batool “to provide safe care”.

It stated there were multiple occasions throughout Sara’s life when “more robust safeguarding processes were needed to properly investigate the possibility that she was experiencing significant harm”.

These included a two-day school absence in March 2023, five months before her death after which she returned “quiet and coy” and with bruising to her cheek, eye and chin.

While Sara’s school made a referral to social services, the case was closed within days, without police being contacted.

Sharif had lied to a social worker saying Sara had lots of marks because of machinery she was hooked up to when born prematurely, information the review said was false.

The following month, Sharif emailed the school to say he intended to educate his daughter at home – a move the review concludes was undoubtedly made “to keep Sara hidden from view in the last weeks of her life”.

A series of missed opportunities followed, with delays in correspondence and an old home address on the digital system resulting in a visit by a council worker to the wrong location on August 7 – just two days before Sara died on August 9.

Had Surrey Council’s policy on home education of offering a home visit within 10 days of notification been followed, and the child been seen, “it is likely that the abuse of Sara would have come to light, or (her) father’s refusal to co-operate would have undoubtably raised a safeguarding alert”, the review said.

Surrey children’s services had failed to “identify that Sara was at risk of being abused by her father, stepmother and uncle”; “expected robust safeguarding processes were not followed”; and the child’s “‘voice’ expressed through her change in demeanour was not heard”; the review said.

Sara had not not spoken of the abuse she was experiencing, it added, instead appearing “cheerful and loyal to her father, whilst he continually groomed and manipulated her, and the professionals who could have helped her”.

Aged eight, Sara had begun to wear the hijab in 2021, which the review said hid bruising and injuries to her face and head in the later period of her life.

It said while the school had shown “appropriate curiosity”, there was no evidence in the children’s services or health records that race, culture, religion or heritage were “properly considered”, and expert advice since obtained from the local Muslim community suggested it would have been “highly unusual” for such a young child to decide to wear it when other family members did not.

The review concluded that, despite information available across the system, “opportunities were lost to join up all the dots and recognise the dangers faced by Sara once she moved in with her father and stepmother”.

Among 15 recommendations, the review authors called for improvements in how referrals to children’s services are dealt with, including better resourcing and capacity, qualifications and experience of staff; and updated statutory guidance to require that where an application is made to home school a child previously known to children’s social care, a formal meeting with parents and professionals should take place.

Commenting on the local review, the national Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel said Sara’s memory can be honoured “by understanding what happened to her and by redoubling our efforts to protect children from those who set out to harm them”.

Its chair, Sir David Holmes, said: “This comprehensive review contains deep learning for everyone working in child protection.

“It reminds us of the vital role of robust safeguarding processes in the elective home education system, the need for a greater focus on the devastating impact of domestic abuse on children, and the need always to give enough weight to safeguarding risks in the context of private law proceedings involving vulnerable children.”

Surrey police said this was “one of the most shocking and tragic cases we have ever investigated” and that the force “will work with the partnership to help implement its recommendations and safeguard our children and young people as effectively as possible”.