This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/indian-restaurant-owner-mohammed-zaman-jailed-for-six-years-for-killing-customer-with-curry-a7043596.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Indian restaurant owner Mohammed Zaman jailed for six years for killing customer with curry | Indian restaurant owner Mohammed Zaman jailed for six years for killing customer with curry |
(35 minutes later) | |
The owner of an Indian restaurant has been jailed for six years after he was convicted of killing a customer with a nut allergy by supplying him with a takeaway containing peanuts. | The owner of an Indian restaurant has been jailed for six years after he was convicted of killing a customer with a nut allergy by supplying him with a takeaway containing peanuts. |
Mohammed Zaman, 53, the owner of Indian Garden in Easingwold, was convicted of Paul Wilson's manslaughter following a trial at Teesside Crown Court. | |
Mr Wilson, 38, had asked for a chicken tikka masala with “no nuts”, but the curry he was given had been cooked with a ground nut mix containing peanuts. | |
He was given the curry despite the request being clearly marked on the lid of his meal. | |
The prosecution claimed Zaman, from Huntington, York, switched from almond powder to the cheaper nut mix in order to cut costs. | |
The court heard that Zaman, who is said to have almost £300,000 of business debts, took a “reckless and cavalier attitude to risk” and “put profit before safety”. | |
Mr Wilson, a bar manager, had a fatal anaphylactic shock at his home in Helperby, North Yorkshire, in January 2014. | |
He died three weeks after a teenage customer at another of Zaman's six restaurants suffered an allergic reaction which required hospital treatment. | |
Zaman was found guilty of all charges except perverting course of justice. | |
The case is thought to be a legal first which sets a precedent for food suppliers. | The case is thought to be a legal first which sets a precedent for food suppliers. |
Additional reporting by Press Association |