Leicester Man Cleared of Rape Jailed for Property Threats

A Leicester man who faced nine criminal charges — including three counts of rape — has walked free from the most serious allegations but been handed a six-month prison sentence after being convicted of smashing windows and making threats to damage property.

What Happened at Leicester Crown Court

Wahid Rob, 27, of no fixed address, appeared before Leicester Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, 2 October last year facing a total of nine charges. The allegations included three counts of rape, with two said to have occurred on Friday, 12 September and a third between Saturday, 16 August and Tuesday, 19 August. He also faced a charge of assault by penetration, making threats to kill, and threatening to damage property.

Magistrates determined the case was too serious for their jurisdiction and sent it to the Crown Court, remanding Rob in custody in the meantime. When he appeared at Leicester Crown Court in February, the proceedings took a dramatic turn.

The Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence on the three rape charges, the threats to kill allegation, or the assault by penetration charge. In practical terms, this meant Rob was formally acquitted of all those offences — not because a jury found him not guilty after a full trial, but because prosecutors decided not to pursue them.

Rob was, however, convicted of two remaining offences: criminal damage to three windows at a property on Monday, 29 September, and making threats to damage property. The judge sentenced him to six months in prison for those offences. He was also ordered to pay a £154 victim surcharge.

The CPS Decision: No Evidence Offered

The phrase “offered no evidence” is a specific legal procedure in English courts. It means the Crown Prosecution Service made a deliberate decision not to present any evidence in support of those charges — typically when prosecutors conclude there is insufficient evidence to offer a realistic prospect of conviction. It is not an acquittal by a jury and does not constitute a finding of innocence, but it does result in a not guilty verdict being formally entered by the court.

The Leicester case is a reminder of how complex and at times deeply unsatisfying the criminal justice process can appear to those on the outside. The most serious allegations — charges that, if proven, would typically carry very lengthy custodial sentences — were simply dropped at the Crown Court stage without a trial taking place.

Rob ultimately received six months for what, in the context of the original charge sheet, are relatively minor criminal damage offences. Given that he had already spent time on remand awaiting trial, the practical effect of that sentence may have been limited.

Our Take: A System That Raises More Questions Than Answers

Let’s be straight about this. A 27-year-old man stood accused of three rapes, threats to kill, and assault by penetration. Those are among the most serious offences on the statute book. And yet the Crown Prosecution Service walked into court and told the judge they weren’t going to present any evidence on any of them.

Nobody outside that courtroom — and very few inside it — will ever know the full reasons why. The CPS doesn’t owe the public a detailed explanation. That’s how the system works. But that doesn’t mean the public has to find it satisfying. Because it isn’t.

The complainant or complainants in this case — whoever made those allegations — will now watch a man leave prison after six months for broken windows. Whatever the truth of what happened between January and September last year, that is an outcome that demands at least some reflection.

There is a reasonable argument, of course, that the system worked exactly as it should. If the evidence wasn’t there, it wasn’t there. Putting someone through a full rape trial on the basis of weak evidence would be wrong — wrong for the defendant, and ultimately wrong for victims too, because it risks bad verdicts and erodes public confidence in the courts. The CPS dropping charges it cannot realistically prove is not a scandal; it is how responsible prosecution is supposed to function.

But there is an equally reasonable question about why those charges were brought in the first place, why Rob was remanded in custody for months, and what — if anything — was done to investigate the case thoroughly before it reached the Crown Court.

The Leicester justice system processes hundreds of cases every year. Most of them don’t make the papers. This one did, briefly, and then it disappeared into the statistics. We think it deserves a little more than that. We’ll be keeping an eye on how Leicester Crown Court handles cases like this — and we’ll make sure you know what’s happening on your doorstep.

Have Your Say

What do you make of how this Leicester case was handled? Do you think the Crown Prosecution Service made the right call — or do you think the public deserves more transparency when serious charges are dropped? Share your thoughts in the comments below. If you want to stay across the latest court news and community stories from Leicester and the wider East Midlands, sign up for our free local news updates and never miss what matters.