Secrets of American 'Hitwoman in a Hijab' Exposed

A shocking attempted murder in the UK. sparked a years'sl long international. manhunt and it all culminated in the. sentencing of the woman who carried it. out. We're going to break down this. absolutely bizarre story of how American. woman Amy Betro became embroiled in this. case and we are going to speak with the. UK criminal attorney for insight into. how cases like this are investigated and. prosecuted. Welcome to Sidebar presented. by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. [Music].

After years on the run and a highstakes. international manhunt, an American woman. finally faced the courtroom in the UK. and the possibility of a decadesl long. sentence hanging over her head. Now, in. case you haven't been following this, okay, we got to rewind. This is a wild. ride to say the least. We're going to. take it step by step. Okay, this sounds. like it's from a movie. It's not. We're. talking about Amy Betra. This is a. Wisconsin woman who once posted online.

about relocating to London. But, you. know, instead of chasing a new life. abroad, she found herself entangled in. an assassination plot that would make. her the target of an international. manhunt. For years, she was a fugitive. at the center of a global search. How. did she get there? Let's talk about it. Now, according to reporting from the. BBC, Amy was from West Alice, Wisconsin, and she lived a pretty ordinary life on. paper. She had been a pet sitter, a.

graphic designer, even a top sales. representative for the Milwaukee Brewers. ticket office on her LinkedIn. She mused. about music and travel and wanting to. relocate to London or California. Dreams. that, strangely enough, would take a. very dark turn because at around 2018, Amy met Muhammad Nazir on a dating app. began making trips to the UK to see him. Azir and his father, Muhammad Alam, they. were caught up in this violent feud that. happened at this clothing store, a.

fight, and police later said that it was. revenge that consumed them. And Amy. apparently became the weapon that they. tried to use. By September of 2019, Amy. was allegedly part of their plan. You. can see in this video from Midland's. police on September 7th, she is. disguised in hijab, waits outside the. home of the man Azir wanted dead, and. when he arrived, she raised a gun to his. face, but miraculously the gun jammed. A.

miracle. It's It's incredible. Now, instead of abandoning the mission, what. does Amy do? She returns hours later and. fires shots into the house to drive the. fear home. She also apparently texted. the victim's father. A chilling message. According to police, it read, "Stop. playing hideand-seek. You're lucky it. jammed. Who is it? Your family or you? Pick one." Wow. All right. So, the next. day, Amy was spotted on CCTV footage at.

the airport flying back to Wisconsin. Nazir apparently slipped out of the UK, too. Together, they took this bizarre. American road trip. to Seattle, San. Francisco, Las Vegas, even a stop at. Area 51 in Nevada. This is all before. they vanished. And by the time. investigators tied her to the crime, Amy. was gone. For the next 5 years, she was. an international fugitive. In June of. 2024, her own mother told the Telegraph. that she was begging her daughter to. turn herself in, warning that she had.

nowhere else to go and admitted she. would call police if Amy showed up at. her door. Now, the big break in this. case came in the summer of 2024, and it. was actually thanks to the efforts of. the media, particularly the Daily Mail. The outlet reports that through its own. investigation, it was able to tip off police to Betra's. location in Armenia, and agreed to halt. covering the case so that the police. could zero in on her and extradite her. back to the UK to stand trial. And by.

the way, we didn't just take the Daily. Mail's word for it. The BBC also. reported on what the newspaper did here. So, when Bro finally faced a jury in. Birmingham, do you think she was. accountable for her actions? You think. she took responsibility? No. No. The Daily Mail reports that her. case was filled with nothing but denials. of some really hardcore evidence, DNA, CCTV footage. There was a rare American. pistol that no one in the UK had ever. seen before, apparently. So, let's get.

into this. But first, to help me break. all this down, I want to bring on a. special guest who's joining us. internationally from the UK, criminal. litigation attorney Nick Brett. Nick, thank you so much for coming here on. Sidebar. Really appreciate it. Let's. start right here. What are the key legal. requirements when what we're talking. about when we're saying extraditing an. American citizen to the UK, either it's. from, you know, the US or Armenia, wherever it might be. What What are we. talking about? Well, I mean, we we have. a a bilateral agreement with the United. States and have done for many years. relating to extradition, um, which is.

something that seems to function. extremely well. Effectively speaking, as. with most extradition treaties, what. there needs to be is a basis for um, suggesting that there is um, evidence. that somebody has committed a crime and. for which they um, ought to stand trial. in the UK. What a case, I know. But this. is definitely one we wanted to bring to. you. And the reason that we can do that. is because of the amazing support that. we get from our sponsor, Morgan and.

Morgan. This is America's largest injury. law firm. This is a firm with over a. thousand attorneys. You know why they're. so big? Because they win a lot. They. have recovered over $25 billion for more. than 500,000 clients. Think about that. In the past few months, a client in. Florida received $12 million after the. insurance company offered just $350,000. Out in Pennsylvania, a client was. awarded $26 million. That is 40 times. the insur $650,000 offer. Another client. in Pennsylvania received $29 million.

That's after being offered only. $500,000. And even if you think your. case isn't worth, you know, millions of. dollars, why not start a claim and fight. for what you deserve? Morgan and Morgan, they make it so simple. You can start a. claim from your phone in just eight. clicks. So, if you're injured, you can. easily start a claim at. forthepeople.com/lcsidebar. by clicking the link below or scanning. the QR code on screen. Um, and you know, as I say, there is an. agreement between the United States and.

uh the UK um regarding the extradition. of suspects both ways. Um and so recent examples of. um those that have gone to the United. States, Mike Lynch, who was was. notoriously tried in the United States. for fraud and acquitted and then. subsequently died in the yaching um. disaster last year. Um so really there. is a a a a.

quite um effective agreement between the. United States and the United Kingdom. with respect to the transfer of suspects. for criminal prosecution. >> and other countries. has that become a. little bit more difficult again like. we're talking like with Armenia. >> It really depends on it really depends. on the country in question. So we have. um uh an agreement with all EU nations. um regarding extradition. Um we then. have separate treaties with other. countries outside of the EU. And so for. example,

presence in certain countries um. Pakistan. um Saudi Arabia um it would be more. difficult for the UK government to seek. um the extradition of um suspects who. are hiding in those countries um than it. would be for example to come to um to to. go to France and to to to ask the French. to extradite Right. And similarly, you. know, with the United States.

>> So now you have all this evidence in a. case like this, and if it goes to a UK. court, we're talking DNA, we're talking. CCTV footage, we're talking a foreign. firearm. A, what do you make of this. kind of evidence? And B, are there. special rules um for how this evidence. can be admitted and used at a trial? Well, the there are rules relating to. the admissibility of evidence in the. United Kingdom. Um, and so forensic.

evidence, for example, um, needs to be. introduced um, by what we determined to. be an expert witness. So, somebody who. has the relevant experience to introduce. that evidence and then to produce. reports of their examination. So DNA for. example is frequently used in criminal. trials in the United Kingdom. The. examination of DNA is undertaken by. specially trained experts with. experience um who will then produce a. report of their findings. Sometimes.

there can be question marks about the. admissibility of of expert evidence on. the basis that there is a challenge to. the expertise of the witness in. question. Um although I'm not um aware. that there were any such challenges in. in the Metro case. >> Talking about her case, I'm going to get. into her defense in a second, but one of. the things I wondered would a defense of. let's say coercion or duress. Could that. be raised, right? She was acting under. pressure from Nazir or his father or did.

she really have a sense of autonomy here. and that wouldn't work? arrest is a. defense um to certain crimes including. murder um in um English courts. Um it is. a notoriously difficult defense to run. Um duress really requires the. persuasion. So the burden would shift to. the defendant to persuade.

um the jury that they had no other. choice um because they felt that um they. would lose their life or the life of a. close one um if they didn't act in the. way in which they were that they were um. told to do. I mean in a case like this. bearing in mind that betro was outside. of the jurisdiction before she came. here would obviously be a difficult. defense for her to run. Let's talk about. the defense that she did run with uh. because in court in court she denied.

everything everything despite being you. know presented with CCTV footage DNA. acquired from a glove in the Mercedes. that was used in the shooting. A witness. describing a short fat American woman. And they even traced this gun. This rare. American highpoint pistol reportedly has. never been seen before in the UK. That. weapon was never recovered, but. ballistics experts determined from. footage that was the weapon that was. used. Nick, how compelling, Let's start.

with this. How compelling is CCTV. footage in UK criminal trials when the. defendant is disputing identity or. involvement? It seems to me when we're. talking about footage of her after the. shooting, another of the shooter with a. gun drawn, her in the area, her at a. McDonald's after the shooting. eh feel. felt like pretty tough to argue against. >> Exactly. I mean CCTV evidence is a very. common feature in trials um in England.

and I'm sure it's the same in the United. States and real expertise has developed. um over the identification of suspects. um using forensic techniques um to um. ensure that really comparisons are are. you know can be proven beyond a. reasonable doubt by characteristics and. measurements of size of head and body. Um so there are all sorts of techniques. now um which mean it's very very. difficult for any defendant um you know.

to deny their presence on CCTV unless. the footage is really quite poor. I mean. obviously you know CCTV footage does. vary in in quality. I think that as time. goes on CCTV is getting um more and more. advanced. Um but um you know certainly. techniques have improved radically um. over recent years. >> and and the firearm I thought was. interesting. Right. If a firearm was. never recovered but experts identified. from footage and ballistics and they're.

saying this is a firearm that's really. has no presence in the UK. I thought. that was significant. >> Yeah. Well, I mean firearms. are not prevalent in the UK as you know. Um there are very strict laws around the. possession of firearms. Um if one is. found in possession of a prohibited. firearm or prohibited ammunition, then. minimum sentences of 5 years apply. Um.

and so there are very very strict laws. against um the possession and use of. firearms um in this country. And. therefore, I think it it does make it. easier um for a ballistics expert in in. the UK giving evidence for the. prosecution to identify that particular. firearms um would be very very unlikely. to have come from any other particular. source or used in any other particular. incident simply because of their.

scarcity. >> And they can it's amazing that they can. determine what the weapon is not even by. looking at it. I mean, not even having. it in the possession, but seeing it from. footage and able to determine what that. might be and through the ballistics. evidence. I always find that. fascinating. >> It's incredible. You. >> Yeah. No, please, Nick. >> So, it's incredible. Yeah. And and. obviously examination of of of bullets. themselves um can determine as a result. of the markings on those bullets how. they were discharged and from what. weapon they're likely to have been. discharged from. So, yes, again, it's a.

very very developed area of expertise. By the way, I believe this was a jury. trial that she had. Um, and if I'm. correct about that, what is the. framework of it? How is it structured? Is it, you know, the prosecution goes. first, they call their witnesses, the. defense has an opportunity to question. the witnesses, the defense puts on a. case, it's sent back to deliberation. Um, you know, do they have a limited. amount of time that they can deliberate. for? Um, how many people are in the.

jury? How does it what does a trial. typically look like in the UK? >> Well, you you've you you've summarized. it pretty accurately. Um, first of all, a jury panel a jury is impanled. We call. it empaneling a jury. So there is a a a. group of say sometimes 60 people who've. been called up for jury service to a. particular court and 12 of them uh will. be selected and they will be asked. various questions to ensure that there. is no reason why they may be prejudiced. in any particular case by for example. knowing the defendant or any of the.

witnesses or having some particular. interest which is relevant to the trial. which may affect the way in which they. deliberate. And once the judge is. satisfied that he has a jury of of 12. people, they're sworn in. And once the. juryy's sworn in, the prosecution opens. the case. So that means that a. barristister instructed by the. prosecution reads what's called an. opening speech. I'm setting out what the. prosecution say about the case. I it the defense don't have any part to.

play at this juncture. And the. prosecution will then call their. witnesses. Um so first of all, they'll. call their first witness. Um quite often. in in a case of complainant so um you. know somebody who who is the victim in. the case they will give evidence in. chief which means it's the evidence. which they are giving for the. prosecution and then then they will be. cross-examined and then the defense get. an opportunity to cross-examine each. prosecution witness until the. prosecution closes its case and once the. prosecution closes its case the the the.

Batman goes over to the defense. Um and. it it is it does happen sometimes but it. is quite rare for there to be defense. opening speeches. The defense would. usually call the defendant if the. defendant wishes to give evidence. So. the defendant's not required to give. evidence and then that defendant is then. gives evidence in chief is then. cross-examined by the prosecution and. will and the defense will then call any. other evidence that they wish to call. So sometimes expert witnesses if those.

experts haven't been agreed in writing. before and read before a jury or other. or other witnesses witnesses of fact or. even character for the for for for the. defense and then there is a. the closing defense case a prosecution. closing speech um and then finally a. defense closing speech and then the. judge will sum up the case to the jury. So it's a a process called summing up in. which he sets out both both both both. parties cases and he sends the jury out.

first of all to find whether or not they. can reach a verdict on which they all. agree and if they can and there's no. actual time limit um to how long the. jury is given for that. Um it will. depend on the case and the complexities. of the case. So for example, a. longunning complex fraud case would uh. mean that the jury would be given much. more time than a say a much shorter case. involving shoplifting for example. And. if they can't reach an agreement upon so. reach upon which they all agree, they.

can then be sent back out for what's. called a majority direction. So that is. a direction upon which at least 10 of. them must agree. And if at least 10. agree, so either 10 to two or 11 to one, um then. um uh that verdict is entered. And if. they can't reach a verdict, um then uh. they have what's what is known as a hung. jury um and the jury is discharged and. then the prosecution could decide. whether they wish to prosecute again at. some stage in the future. >> What? That's amazing. So wait a minute, they don't necessarily always have to be.

unanimous as long as you then you get a. majority. Is that always the way it. works? It's like does a judge say that. hey listen by law I I have to now send. you back to just get a majority or will. some judges say hey listen if I couldn't. get unanimous that's it. >> well no a judge I mean a judge. ordinarily would I mean unless there was. some exceptional circumstances would or. you know if a jury can't reach agreement. um I mean sometimes a jury I mean some. the jury juries send notes um they can. send notes to to a judge and sometimes.

you know there are circumstances on. which the foreman so there's a foreman. of the jury appointed may say there's. just no prospect of us ever being able. to agree because we're split. >> but but you could get a verdict you. could get a conviction just on a. majority. >> just on a majority but it has to be. minimum of 10. >> minimum of 10 yeah. >> minimum of 10 either way so either. either in favor of conviction or quiddle. >> interesting that's interesting I didn't. know that um okay so let's talk about. this so the jurors here they learned a.

lot more they learned a lot more about's. relationship ship with Muhammad Nazir. And per the BBC, the pair had apparently. texted and video called regularly. She. even visited Nazir a few times in 2018. and 19. And as for why she seemingly. agreed to commit this murder, this. attempted murder. Prosecutors alleged. she was smitten. She was smitten with. Nazir. Nick, you know, let's talk about. that. That was an interesting motive in. this case. >> Very strange. I mean it was a it was of.

course a a conspiracy case. So a. conspiracy um in England is an agreement. to commit a crime. And so um they. obviously reached as you say a certain. point in their relationship where he had. a um I I would imagine some form of hold. over her as a result of her um emotions. towards him. Um, and you know, it would. appear that it was that that caused her. to behave in the way that she did.

>> And on August 12th, after almost 24. hours of deliberations, that jury. convicted her, convicted Betro of. conspiracy to commit murder, possessing. a self-loading pistol with intent to. cause fear of violence, and illegally. importing ammunition. And on August. 21st, she was sentenced to 30 years in. prison. Nick, did they get it right? Well, I I I mean I I read the I read the. judge's sentencing uh remarks and he was.

quite careful to make a comparison with. the guidelines. So judges have. guidelines um for attempted murder. Um, and he considered, I mean, this was. really an attempted murder case because. obviously there was a. a problem with the discharge of the. firearm such that it meant that, you. know, had that not happened, it may well. have been a. fatality. Um, and so he was quite. careful to make the comparison first of. all with with those sentencing.

guidelines to because there are no. sentencing guidelines for conspiracy to. murder. It being quite an unusual. charge. Um, and he also was obviously. able to make comparison with the. sentences he passed last year on the. father and the son. And then he. passed the separate sentence on the. other two firearms offenses. And um and. so the the the the the upshot is that. she serves 30 years well 30 the sentence. was 30 years imprisonment of which she.

will serve twothirds 20. Um, you mean a minimum, right? Or or. could she theoretically get served out. the full 30? >> She could. I mean, ordinarily, she would. be released after the 2/3 point on. license. So, that means that she remains. uh subject to recall in the event that. she would commit any further crime in. that further period of 10 years. >> It's interesting when you think about. that. Um, was there any kind of.

mitigating factors? I don't know, lack. of prior criminal record, emotional. manipulation. Could that have been. considered as a mitigating factor during. >> I mean there's there's always mitigation. and I think there probably, you know, were those kinds of factors in this. case, but the problem is that the crime. is so serious that I think personal. mitigation usually in sentences of this. nature has little real bearing on the on. the overall outcome. I mean, credit does.

um that that i.e. that if a a defendant. pleads guilty to a crime, then he or she. is entitled to a discount depending on. when they plead guilty of up to 30%. So, a reduction in the sentence would. otherwise have been imposed um after a. trial with the thought being that you. know it saves the state time and money. if they don't have to go through with. the prosecution. >> But to you, it makes sense the jury's. verdict, right, that she was convicted. based on the evidence that was presented. against her. Yes, it does. Absolutely.

>> Yeah. And um and could she appeal? >> She could appeal. Um if you're going to. appeal against your conviction or. sentence, you need to make that. application within 28 days of the. decision. Your application is made in. writing first of all for permission to. appeal and it goes in front of a single. judge sitting in private. So not not in. an open court. he makes a decision. whether or not to grant permission. If. he refuses, you can renew that. application before the full court, which.

is three judges. Um, if he grants. permission to appeal, then the matter is. set down for a hearing in front of three. judges in the Court of Appeal, which is. based here in the Royal Courts of. Justice in London. And they would then. determine on the question of conviction. whether or not in all the circumstances. that conviction was safe and on the. question of sentence whether or not um. the sentence was manifestally excessive. and and that and that was interesting. that you talk about the sentence because. of your conversation before when you. talk about the severity of the gun laws.

in your jurisdiction, right? the idea of. possessing a self-loading pistol with. intent to cause fear of violence or. illegally importing ammunition. The. judge was looking to these very serious. crimes to help determine what should be. the appropriate sentence in this case. when looking at conspiracy to murder. Th. those are incredibly serious charges, right? The the idea of the ammunition. and the possession of the the possession. of the weapon. >> That's absolutely right. And you'll see. that he imposed concurrent sentences.

with respect to those second those the. second and third charges. What that. means concurrent sentences they actually. served along at the same time. So he. would have considered um what is called. a principle called totality. So he would. have considered what was was the overall. sentence that he that that that he. passed um commenurate with the. criminality the overall criminality in. the case and um he formed the view that. the 30-year sentence was the appropriate. one to pass in the circumstances. Well, following Betro sentencing,

Detective Chief Inspector Alistair. Orrenis uh of the West Midlands Police. told the BBC, "This is a unique case. which has involved a huge amount of work. tracing the movements of Pro from her. arrival into the UK. Her subsequent. failed attempt to shoot a man dead and. her departure from the UK. It's by luck. that her attempt to kill her target. failed thanks to the jamming of her gun, and an incredible amount of work went. into building up a really detailed. picture of her activities while in the. UK. We work really closely with partners.

such as the American government, NCA, FBI, Crown Prosecution Service, and the. Derby Constabularary to bring Betro back. to the UK to face justice. You know, Nick, I think that really sums it up. well. This is a unique crime. You had. all of these different agencies working. together to seek justice. This was. taking many years. What do you think. about how this all concluded? Well, I think that um the National Crime. Agency, for example, would have been. involved in the extradition process,

which it seems to me was fairly long and. convoluted because she was certainly in. custody in Armenia, wasn't she, for I. think well, nearly a year or maybe six. months or so. Um so, you know, unquestionably there has been. coordination as there often is when you. know, such a serious crime has been. committed. Police resources do um tend. to be um you know properly focused on. ensuring that where lives are put at. risk in this way and where firearms are.

concerned um that um you know. appropriate um dedication is placed um. to ensuring that that that that all of. the the um the culprits are brought to. justice. And of course, you know, there. there was a previous case involving the. father and the son last year who both. received fairly substantial prison. sentences. >> What a saga. Nick, thanks so much for. coming on. Really appreciate it. Was. great to see. >> you. >> You got it. >> Nice to see you. Cheers. Bye. >> All right everybody, that's all we have. for you right now here on Sidebar. Thank.

you so much for joining us and as. always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you. should get your podcasts. I'm Jesse. Weber. I'll speak to you next time. [Music].