On Friday, a 23-year-old Afghan asylum seeker was jailed for 15 years after abducting and raping a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton, just four months after arriving in the UK. Ahmad Mulakhil was sentenced at Warwick Crown Court after being convicted of rape of a child under 13, child abduction, sexual assault, and making indecent images of the victim by filming her. Judge Kristina Montgomery said there was “no doubt” he knew the girl was under 16, despite his claim that she had told him she was 19. Various reports confirm that the sentence makes him automatically liable for deportation.
The Horrific Attack in Nuneaton
Mulakhil first approached the girl in a UK park in July 2025 while she was playing on the swings. Doorbell and CCTV footage later showed him asking her age and asking for identification. The victim told him she was 19, which the judge called “an obvious lie,” and the court concluded that his reaction showed he did not believe it. Later that evening, he lured her into a secluded cul-de-sac and attacked her.
The court heard that he laughed during the assault. European Conservative reported that jurors also heard he filmed the attack on his phone and threatened to kill the girl’s family. Prosecutors said the victim continues to suffer severe psychological trauma and ongoing medical problems. She was later found in a park by members of the public, who alerted emergency services.
Mulakhil had previously pleaded guilty to a further count of rape of a child under 13. He was also found guilty of abducting a child, sexual assault, and making indecent images of the victim. He was cleared of a second count of rape after jurors deliberated for more than seven hours.
“Stop the Invasion – End Immigration”
This case caused outrage long before sentencing because it concentrated so many of the public’s worst fears into one crime. Mulakhil’s status as an asylum seeker was not initially disclosed by police, which helped trigger a local political row after the attack. The initial case sparked protests in Nuneaton last summer. European Conservative reported that protesters gathered outside Warwick Crown Court ahead of sentencing, with demonstrators holding banners reading “Stop the invasion – end immigration,” as the case intensified debate over border control and asylum policy.
There was also the question of how he was identified. After the attack, Mulakhil was seen on CCTV taking the distressed girl to a nearby shop, where he bought two cans of Red Bull using a Home Office-issued Aspen card, the debit card provided to asylum seekers. That transaction helped police trace him and arrest him at home four days later. It almost sounds almost too on-the-nose to be real. A man who had entered the country, claimed protection, and then raped a child was partly identified through the taxpayer-funded support system provided to him after arrival.
The defence angle only deepened the disgust. Protothema and ITV both reported that Mulakhil claimed he believed the girl was 19. The judge rejected that outright. Judge Montgomery said there was “no doubt that you knew she was aged under 16.” In other words, the court was not dealing with confusion. It was dealing with a man who targeted a child and then tried to hide behind an excuse the judge and jury did not believe.
The Case Against Immigration Deepens
Anti-immigration campaigners have seized on other serious offences involving asylum seekers, especially young men housed in hotels, to highlight that UK communities continue to be put at risk. This specific case further demonstrates their point: Mulakhil arrived in the UK, sought asylum, and within four months had abducted and raped a 12-year-old girl.
The public is repeatedly asked to accept that border failures are abstract, manageable, or best discussed in the sterile language of processing backlogs and accommodation pressures. Then a case like this cuts through the official fog. It forces a much simpler question. If the system cannot prevent a man from arriving, settling into state support, and committing an offence of this kind against a child within months, what exactly is the system protecting? This is why these cases do not remain “isolated incidents” in the public mind. They become symbols of a state that appears unable or unwilling to distinguish compassion from recklessness.
Final Thought
Friday’s sentence delivered justice of the kind a criminal court can provide. It established guilt, imposed a lengthy term, and ensured that Ahmad Mulakhil will one day face deportation. What it cannot do is answer the broader question this case leaves behind. A 12-year-old girl was attacked in a public park by a man who had been in the UK for only a matter of months.
That fact will linger long after the legal process has ended, not only because of the horror of the crime itself, but because it speaks to a deeper public unease about whether the state still understands its first duty. The issue is no longer simply what punishment follows such an offence, but how a system meant to offer refuge, order and protection came to be associated, in cases like this, with preventable danger.
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: UK News
Hi G Calder,
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
This is a continuation of the Moslem rape gangs.
The same gangs who have not been to trial, because they have lost all the paperwork years ago.
This government of ours have all been selected and not elected.
The government should prosecuted for reckless endangerment of the general population, but this specific case could be used to establish precedent. Why is this not happening?
….because no legal prosecutor want to risk their career. What a gutless society we have created.
Because it is/was a deliberated “Set-Up”, to sabotage England and Europe.
Just like every other crazy stuff which have been happening in the world.