Rapist's appeal is dismissed after judges say new evidence is 'unreliable'

Ferdos Rabani was jailed for 24 years following a trial at Sheffield Crown Court in November 2016.

The court heard Rabani, who had a previous conviction for rape, picked a woman up after she had been out drinking in Sheffield in April 2016, drove her down a country road and offered her a cigarette, which turned out to be a joint containing Spice.

He raped the woman before dropping her back at the Salvation Army hostel where she was then staying, but later denied that they ever had sex.

But in March 2020, the victim’s ex-boyfriend wrote to Rabani and said: “She told me she lied and there was no sex involved at all and she made that part of the story up due to police presher (sic), financial gain and feeling stupid".

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons and does not know Rabani personally, supported the victim’s version of events when they were dating in 2016, but said she admitted the allegation was false during a conversation after the trial.

The rapist lodged an appeal with the Court of Appeal and said there were grounds for a retrial, but it was dismissed by a panel of three judges who said the claims made by the ex-boyfriend were “inconsistent and unreliable” and not “capable of belief” following a hearing earlier this month.

In their ruling, the judges identified a number of inconsistencies between statements he made in 2016 and the claims he made during the Court of Appeal hearing this month.

They also said he could not remember a visit from a police officer, who went to take a statement, even though “he wanted to help” Rabani and “had asked for the police to come to see him”.

The judges said this “does not give the court much confidence in his recollection of the conversation” which he claimed to have had with the victim in November 2016.

They also said it “seems extraordinary” that the ex-boyfriend would wait several years to take action and report the conversation when it was “weighing so heavily on his mind”.

The man, who suffers with mental health and addiction issues, said his ex-girlfriend falsely claimed rape “due to police presher, financial gain and feeling stupid" but the judges said this “makes no sense”.

In the ruling, they said she reported the rape to Salvation Army Chaplain before contacting the police, there was “no evidence of any financial motivation” and she had initially refrained from calling the police because she felt “stupid”.

“We do not consider his evidence about the conversation with the complainant to be reliable for all the reasons set out above. We do not accept that such a conversation took place,” the ruling stated.

“It is impossible to know on the evidence before this court what actual conversation between the complainant and (the boyfriend) has led him to develop that inaccurate recollection.”

The case was presided over by Lord Justice Dingemans, Mr Justice Hilliard and His Honour Judge Altham.