Shock Result: Jury Deadlocked in Trial of Egyptian Hockey Coach Accused of Murdering Wife

A jury has been discharged after failing to reach a verdict in the trial of Mohamed Samak, who stands accused of murdering his wife, Joanne, at their Droitwich Spa home on 1 July 2024A jury has been discharged after failing to reach a verdict in the trial of Mohamed Samak, who stands accused of murdering his wife, Joanne, at their Droitwich Spa home on 1 July 2024

By Jason KingBy Jason King

A jury has been discharged after failing to reach a verdict in the trial of Mohamed Samak, who is accused of killing his wife, Joanne, at their family home in Droitwich Spa on 1 July 2024.

The jury, composed of seven men and four women, deliberated for over nine hours following weeks of evidence. Judge Mr Justice Choudhury had informed them that a 10-1 majority decision would be accepted. However, by Friday, the jurors reported difficulties in reaching a consensus, and on Monday morning, they formally announced they were unable to come to a verdict.

What Happened?What Happened?

Joanne Samak, 49, was found dead in the early hours of 1 July 2024, having suffered multiple stab wounds. Mohamed Samak initially told police he had discovered his wife’s body after she had inflicted fatal wounds on herself. However, he later changed his account, claiming that he had witnessed her stabbing herself multiple times and that he had tried to intervene.

The prosecution pointed to inconsistencies in Samak’s story, particularly his claims of attempting to save her, given the absence of any blood on his clothing. In contrast, a paramedic who attempted CPR was seen with blood-stained gloves. When questioned about this discrepancy, Samak told the court, “I was avoiding touching the cut.”

Conflicting Background AccountsConflicting Background Accounts

Samak argued that his wife had been struggling with alcohol problems and depression, leading to her taking her own life. However, a coroner found no evidence of alcohol abuse, and many witnesses described Joanne as mentally stable in the months leading up to her death.

Joanne, the main earner in the couple, was about to launch a new business venture and was looking forward to a trip to Paris with friends to celebrate her 50th birthday.

Key EvidenceKey Evidence

The prosecution presented several pieces of critical evidence:

• A £180,000 life insurance policy in Joanne’s name.

• Neighbors reported hearing screams at 3 AM on the night of her death.

• A one-hour delay before Samak called emergency services, which was questioned by the prosecution.

The court was also told that in the month before his wife’s death, Samak contacted a financial adviser, appearing “agitated and panicked.” He inquired whether he could claim on any of his policies if he were unable to work due to depression, but was informed that he did not have income protection.

The couple’s relationship had begun in 2011 when Joanne was holidaying in Egypt, where Samak worked at a hotel.

Samak Maintains His InnocenceSamak Maintains His Innocence

Samak has consistently maintained his innocence, insisting that he had no reason to kill his wife. He stated that if he had been unhappy in their marriage, he would have chosen separation over violence.

What Happens Next?What Happens Next?

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) now has seven days to decide whether to pursue a retrial. If prosecutors believe there is still a strong case against Samak, he will face a second trial.

Samak has been remanded in custody until his next scheduled court appearance at Worcester Crown Court on 17 March 2025.

ACCESS TO THE LAW: Understanding the Crime and SentencingACCESS TO THE LAW: Understanding the Crime and Sentencing

As part of our campaign to improve citizens’ access and understanding of UK Criminal law, we will be explaining the relevant UK legislation surrounding any case law relevant to our articles:As part of our campaign to improve citizens’ access and understanding of UK Criminal law, we will be explaining the relevant UK legislation surrounding any case law relevant to our articles:

Jury Deadlocks and Jury DecisionsJury Deadlocks and Jury Decisions

A jury deadlock occurs when the jurors are unable to reach a decision on the verdict in a criminal case. This means that they cannot come to a unanimous decision (or a majority decision, depending on the case) either way—whether guilty or not guilty. In the UK, criminal cases typically require a unanimous decision, but a majority verdict may be accepted after the jury has deliberated for a reasonable amount of time.

If the jury is unable to reach a verdict, despite continued deliberations, the judge may discharge them. Following a jury deadlock, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has up to seven days to decide whether to proceed with a retrial, based on factors such as the strength of the case and the interests of justice. In the interim, the defendant remains under legal supervision until the decision is made.

Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all stay safe, and I’ll see you then.Well, that’s all for now. But until our next article, please stay tuned, stay informed, but most of all stay safe, and I’ll see you then.

Jason KingJason King

Birmingham City-DeskBirmingham City-Desk

Twitter (X) @JasonKingNewsTwitter (X) @JasonKingNews

Jasonkingnews@gmail.comJasonkingnews@gmail.comJasonkingnews@gmail.com