Rape accused has 'revolting' approach, trial hears

An Afghan man accused of repeatedly raping a 12-year-old girl has shown a "revolting" approach to evidence against him, a trial has heard.

Ahmad Mulakhil, 23, and his co-defendant, Mohammad Kabir, 24, are accused by prosecutors of targeting the girl after spotting her in a park in Nuneaton, Warwickshire, on 22 July.

Mulakhil previously admitted oral rape but denied two other counts of rape, two counts of sexual assault, child abduction and taking indecent images of a child.

Kabir has denied intentional strangulation, committing an offence with intent to commit a sexual offence and attempting to take a child.

On Thursday, prosecutor Daniel Oscroft used his closing speech at Warwick Crown Court to submit that Mulakhil and Kabir both had a sexual interest in the victim.

Mulakhil had previously told the court he did not force the girl to do anything and did not threaten her family, but had filmed her during a brief period of sexual activity because she had insisted.

Addressing the court, Oscroft told a jury of seven men and five women Mulakhil had shown "a pretty stomach-churning" approach to the evidence.

"There was no hint in the evidence he gave of any pause for reflection or to consider that in retrospect he made a mistake," he said.

"He is blaming her.

"He has tried to argue that he believed she was an adult, that he initially didn't want anything to do with it, that she drove all of it, and that she consented throughout."

Jury to retire

Referring to the claim the girl had insisted Mulakhil film part of what had happened, Oscroft said: "It's slightly revolting, you may think, that he would even try to suggest that that was all on her."

He said of both defendants: "They knew, both of them, they were dealing with a child.

"They are both guilty, the prosecution say, on each count they face."

Marcus Harry, defending Mulakhil, invited the jury to consider whether the defendant believed the girl was 16 or over.

"Ahmad Mulakhil tells you that he believed she was 20 or 22. You know from the video evidence that she told him she was 19," he said.

"You have seen her yourself. My learned friend says she is obviously under 16 and you may agree.

"If you think it is possible that he believed she was 16 or over then he cannot be guilty of [child] abduction."

The jury is expected to retire to consider its verdict on Friday.

Follow BBC Coventry & Warwickshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.