A FATHER-OF-FIVE who used dye-stained cash obtained from a 'serious' robbery to gamble at two betting shops in Hayes has been jailed for six months.

Christopher Marshall, of Burpham Close, Hayes, was convicted of two charges of possessing criminal property after being tried by a jury at Harrow Crown Court in November this year. He denied the offences.

During his sentencing today (December 16), the court heard that £35,000 in £20 notes was stolen from a security box during a cash-in-transit robbery in Kensington, west London, on December 19 last year.

Just four days later, Marshall, 37, attempted to use £600 of the stolen cash at two bookmakers in Hayes.

Accompanied by at least two other people, he visited Ladbrokes in Botwell Lane, spending £240, before gambling £360 at Betfair, in Kingshill Avenue.

During a subsequent police investigation, his finger prints were discovered on the cash, which became dyed when the security box was forced open.

Marshall, who has a string of previous convictions, including robbery offences, insisted he had no knowledge of the Kensington robbery but failed to explain how he came into possession of the dyed cash.

Representing, Helen Newnham said: "Mr Marshall has admitted he should have been more cautious about who he was associating with, but cash can move very quickly.

"He accepts his record does not look good to the court but he has held a respectable position as a carer for four years and his family rely on him.

"His two youngest children, 10-month-old twins, were born prematurely and as a result have ongoing health problems and very low immune systems, meaning they require special milk which must be purchased from a chemist in crates.

"He is the only one who drives so a custodial sentence would have a serious impact on his family, who would have to use public transport to collect the milk.

"Mr Marshall's girlfriend's family live in Wales so he provides the family with daily support."

But Judge Arran said he had no option other than to jail Marshall.

Sentencing, he told him: "I take into account we are dealing with £600 and your family will suffer, but the evidence against you is overwhelming and the cash could only have been obtained by surreptitious means.

"You have shown no remorse at all and you have failed to explain how you got the notes. The money was obtained from a serious robbery and I have grave reservations that you knew the robbers or could even have be one of them.

"We simply haven't got the full story here."