Within weeks of Yadi Zhang’s arrival in London in September 2017, Jian Wen had left her job and room in a Chinese takeaway and moved into a £5m six-bedroom house near Hampstead Heath.
The women, who claimed to run an international jewellery business trading in diamonds and antiques in countries including Japan, Thailand and China, travelled the world and spent tens of thousands of pounds on designer clothes and shoes in Harrods.
In her newly affluent lifestyle, Wen bought a £25,000 E-Class Mercedes and sent her son to the £6,000-a-term Heathside preparatory school.
But alarm bells rang when she tried to buy some of London’s most expensive properties, including a £23.5m seven-bedroom Hampstead mansion with a swimming pool and a nearby £12.5m home with a cinema and gym.
Wen, who had declared income of just £5,979 in the 2016/17 financial year, could not explain the source of the Bitcoin she would use to pay for the properties and police first raided the women’s home on 31 October 2018.
But it would be another two-and-a-half years before investigators realised they had made the UK’s biggest-ever cryptocurrency seizure when more than 61,000 Bitcoin were discovered in digital wallets.
The cryptocurrency was worth £1.4bn at the time but its value has now risen to more than £3bn, while 23,308 Bitcoin, now worth more than £1bn, linked to the investigation remains in circulation.
The £5bn investment fraud
The Bitcoin came from a £5bn investment scam carried out in China by Zhang, 45, who arrived in the UK on a false St Kitts and Nevis passport after conning nearly 130,000 Chinese investors in fraudulent wealth schemes between 2014 and 2017, a court heard.
Advertisement
Wen was not alleged to have been involved in the underlying fraud.
Zhang, who is also known as Zhimin Qian (which means money in Chinese) has fled the UK and her whereabouts are unknown.
Wen, 42, has been found guilty of one count of money laundering between October 2017 and January 2022 and the jury failed to reach verdicts on two similar counts following a trial at Southwark Crown Court.
Prosecutors are not seeking a retrial and Wen will be sentenced on 10 May.
Image: The women rented a £17,000-a-month house in Hampstead. Pic: CPS
She was acquitted of 10 other money laundering charges at a trial last year, which could not be reported over fears hackers could target the firm holding the seized cryptocurrency if the figures involved were made public.
As a Category A prisoner, Wen, a small woman wearing large round glasses, was led to the witness box in handcuffs, while two dock officers guarded the door as she gave evidence.
She told jurors she grew up in a working-class family in China, where she met her husband Marcus Barraclough before coming to the UK while heavily pregnant on a spousal visa in 2007.
Image: Wen visits the Lindt chocolate shop in Switzerland. Pic: Met Police
Wen’s lifestyle change
The relationship broke down following the birth of their son and she lived a modest lifestyle in Leeds, where she took a law diploma and completed a BA in economics before moving to London in the summer of 2017.
She had already opened cryptocurrency accounts, making meticulous notes in her Wallace and Gromit notebook, but said she had “no idea” she would soon be dealing with Bitcoin on such a “massive scale”.
She applied for dozens of jobs while working in a Chinese takeaway in Abbey Wood, southeast London, where she lived in a room below the restaurant.
Wen said she saw an advert on Chinese social media app WeChat for a “butler” and first met Zhang at the five-star Royal Garden Hotel in Kensington. She later described her role as “live-in PA for a high net worth individual” on her CV.
The women soon moved into a £17,000-a-month Hampstead home after paying a £40,000 deposit and six months’ rent in advance.
Wen took trips to Thailand and Dubai and the women travelled extensively throughout Europe, with Zhang – who used aliases including Rose, Emma, and Hua Hua – avoiding countries with Chinese extradition agreements.
Image: Wen tried to buy Hampstead property. Pic: Met Police
Hampstead mansions and a Tuscan villa
They sold Bitcoin and bought fine jewellery, with receipts found for £25,600 and £18,750 from Christopher Walser Vintage Diamonds, in Zurich, and two watches worth around £49,300 and £69,900 from Van Cleef & Arpels in Switzerland.
Over a three-month period at the end of 2017, more than £90,000 was spent in Harrods on designer women’s clothes, jewellery and shoes using a rewards card in Wen’s name, although she told jurors: “I was the one carrying the bags.”
Wen bought two apartments in Dubai for more than £500,000 and looked into buying a £10m 18th century Tuscan villa with a sea view.
Image: Wen on a trip to Germany. Pic: Met Police
Image: Bundles of cash found in police raids. Pic: CPS
But efforts to buy multimillion-pound properties in London triggered anti-money laundering checks and none of the purchases went ahead because the source of the Bitcoin could not be explained.
Wen initially claimed the cryptocurrency had been mined, then said it was given to her as a “love present”, drawing up a deed of gift stating she had been given 3,000 bitcoin, then worth £15m, by Zhang.
Prosecutors said Wen acted as a “front person” to help disguise the source of the stolen money, which had been used to buy cryptocurrency to remove the proceeds from China.
‘I was duped’
Gillian Jones KC said when Zhang landed in London she needed to convert the Bitcoin back into cash or “property, jewellery or other high-value items”.
Wen accepted she was involved in an arrangement dealing with some of the cryptocurrency but said she did not know or suspect it was from the proceeds of crime, claiming she was “duped” by the woman she called her boss.
“We were close… but looking back now, I was badly used,” she said. “I have no idea where she is.”
Police say they are still actively looking for Zhang.
Sir Keir Starmer’s controversial welfare bill has passed its first hurdle in the Commons despite a sizeable rebellion from his MPs.
The prime minister’s watered-down Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill, aimed at saving £5.5bn, was backed by a majority of 75 on Tuesday evening.
A total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill – the largest rebellion since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s Lone Parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.
After multiple concessions made due to threats of a Labour rebellion, many MPs questioned what they were voting for as the bill had been severely stripped down.
They ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to Universal Credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said the bill voted through “is not expected to deliver any savings over the next four years” because the savings from reducing the Universal Credit health element for new claimants will be roughly offset by the cost of increasing the UC standard allowance.
More from Politics
Just 90 minutes before voting started on Tuesday evening, disabilities minister Stephen Timms announced the last of a series of concessions made as dozens of Labour MPs spoke of their fears for disabled and sick people if the bill was made law.
In a major U-turn, he said changes in eligibility for the personal independence payment (PIP), the main disability payment to help pay for extra costs incurred, would not take place until a review he is carrying out into the benefit is published in autumn 2026.
An amendment brought by Labour MP Rachael Maskell, which aimed to prevent the bill progressing to the next stage, was defeated but 44 Labour MPs voted for it.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:31
Welfare bill blows ‘black hole’ in chancellor’s accounts
A Number 10 source told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby: “Change isn’t easy, we’ve always known that, we’re determined to deliver on the mandate the country gave us, to make Britain work for hardworking people.
“We accept the will of the house, and want to take colleagues with us, our destination – a social security system that supports the most vulnerable, and enables people to thrive – remains.”
But the Conservative shadow chancellor Mel Stride called the vote “farcical” and said the government “ended up in this terrible situation” because they “rushed it”.
He warned the markets “will have noticed that when it comes to taking tougher decisions about controlling and spending, this government has been found wanting”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:02
‘Absolutely lessons to learn’ after welfare vote
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said: “I wish we’d got to this point in a different way. And there are absolutely lessons to learn.
“But I think it’s really important we pass this bill at the second reading, it put some really important reforms to the welfare system – tackling work disincentives, making sure that people with severe conditions would no longer be assessed and alongside our investment in employment support this will help people get back to work, because that’s the brighter future for them.”
She made further concessions on Monday in the hope the rebels’ fears would be allayed, but many were concerned the PIP eligibility was going to be changed at the same time the review was published, meaning its findings would not be taken into account.
Her changes were:
• Current PIP claimants, and any up to November 2026, would have the same eligibility criteria as they do now, instead of the stricter measure proposed
• A consultation into PIP to be “co-produced” with disabled people and published in autumn 2026
• For existing and future Universal Credit (UC) claimants, the combined value of the standard UC allowance and the health top-up will rise “at least in line with inflation” every year for the rest of this parliament
• The UC health top-up, for people with limited ability to work due to a disability or long-term sickness, will get a £300m boost next year – doubling the current amount – then rising to £800m the year after and £1bn in 2028/29.
Labour’s welfare reforms bill has passed, with 335 MPs voting in favour and 260 against.
It came after the government watered down the bill earlier this evening, making a dramatic last-minute concession to the demands of would-be rebel MPs who were concerned about the damage the policy would do to disabled people.
The government has a working majority of 166, so it would have taken 84 rebels to defeat the bill.
In total, 49 Labour MPs still voted against the bill despite the concessions. No MPs from other parties voted alongside the government, although three MPs elected for Labour who have since had the whip removed did so.
Which Labour MPs rebelled?
Last week, 127 Labour MPs signed what they called a “reasoned amendment”, a letter stating their objection to the bill as it was.
The government responded with some concessions to try and win back the rebels, which was enough to convince some of them. But they were still ultimately forced to make more changes today.
In total, 68 MPs who signed the initial “reasoned amendment” eventually voted in favour of the bill.
Nine in 10 MPs elected for the first time at the 2024 general election voted with the government.
That compares with fewer than three quarters of MPs who were voted in before that.
A total of 42 Labour MPs also voted in favour of an amendment that would have stopped the bill from even going to a vote at all. That was voted down by 328 votes to 149.
How does the rebellion compare historically?
If the wording of the bill had remained unchanged and 127 MPs or more had voted against it on Tuesday, it would have been up there as one of the biggest rebellions in British parliamentary history.
As it happened, it was still higher than the largest recorded during Tony Blair’s first year as PM, when 47 of his Labour colleagues (including Diane Abbott, John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn, who also voted against the bill on Tuesday) voted no to his plan to cut benefits for single-parent families.
The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.
A 92-year-old man has been sentenced to life with a minimum term of 20 years in prison for the rape and murder of an elderly widow nearly 60 years ago.
Ryland Headley was found guilty on Monday of killing 75-year-old Louisa Dunne at her Bristol home in June 1967, in what is thought to be the UK’s longest cold case to reach trial, and has been told by the judge he “will die in prison”.
The mother-of-two’s body was found by neighbours after Headley, then a 34-year-old railway worker, forced his way inside the terraced house in the Easton area before attacking her.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:09
The UK’s longest cold case to reach trial
Police found traces of semen and a palm print on one of the rear windows inside the house – but it was about 20 years before DNA testing.
The case remained unsolved for more than 50 years until Avon and Somerset detectives sent off items from the original investigation and found a DNA match to Headley.
He had moved to Suffolk after the murder and served a prison sentence for raping two elderly women in 1977.
Prosecutors said the convictions showed he had a “tendency” to break into people’s homes at night and, in some cases, “target an elderly woman living alone, to have sex with her despite her attempts to fend him off, and to threaten violence”.
Image: Louisa Dunne in 1933. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Headley during his arrest. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Headley, from Ipswich, who did not give evidence, denied raping and murdering Ms Dunne, but was found guilty of both charges after a trial at Bristol Crown Court.
Detectives said forces across the country are investigating whether Headley could be linked to other unsolved crimes.
Mrs Dunne’s granddaughter, Mary Dainton, who was 20 when her relative was killed, told the court that her murder “had a big impact on my mother, my aunt and her family.
“I don’t think my mother ever recovered from it. The anxiety caused by her mother’s brutal rape and murder clouded the rest of her life.
“The fact the offender wasn’t caught caused my mother to become and remain very ill.
“When people found out about the murder, they withdrew from us. In my experience, there is a stigma attached to rape and murder.”
Image: The front of Louisa Dunne’s home. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Louisa Dunne’s skirt. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Finding out her grandmother’s killer had been caught after almost six decades “turned my life upside down,” she said.
“I feel sad and very tired, which has affected the relationships I have with those close to me. I didn’t expect to deal with something of such emotional significance at this stage of my life.
“It saddens me deeply that all the people who knew and loved Louisa are not here to see that justice has been done.”
Image: Palmprint images. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
After her statement, Mr Justice Sweeting told Mrs Dainton: “It is not easy to talk about matters like this in public.
“Thank you very much for doing it in such a clear and dignified way.”
The judge told Headley his crimes showed “a complete disregard for human life and dignity.
“Mrs Dunne was vulnerable, she was a small elderly woman living alone. You treated her as a means to an end.
“The violation of her home, her body and ultimately her life was a pitiless and cruel act by a depraved man.
“She must have experienced considerable pain and fear before her death,” he said.
Sentencing Headley to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 20 years, the judge told him: “You will never be released, you will die in prison.”
Detective Inspector Dave Marchant of Avon and Somerset Police said Headley was “finally facing justice for the horrific crimes he committed against Louisa in 1967.
“The impact of this crime has cast a long shadow over the city and in particular Louisa’s family, who have had to deal with the sadness and trauma ever since.”
The officer praised Ms Dainton’s “resilience and courage” during what he called a “unique” case and thanked investigators from his own force, as well as South West Forensics, detectives from Suffolk Constabulary, the National Crime Agency and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).