It's Happened Again—Authorities Implicated in Asylum Seeker Sexual Assault Charge "Cover Up"
The finer details and how Labour's private accommodation plan spells trouble.
Two Afghan asylum seekers have been charged over the alleged rape of a 12-year-old white girl, sending shockwaves through the small Midlands town of Nuneaton. The Mail on Sunday broke the story on Friday.
Ahmad Mulakhil, 23, stands accused of raping the underage girl, while a second man, Mohammad Kabir, also 23, has been charged with aiding and abetting rape, as well as strangulation and kidnap. The girl is now receiving specialist care.
The alleged attack occurred between 8:30 and 9:45pm on Tuesday, July 22. It took four days for police to locate and charge Mulakhil. Kabir was not arrested and charged until a week later. Both men have been remanded in custody.
Despite the horror of the alleged crime and the public interest in transparency, sources told the Mail that Warwickshire Police advised councillors and local officials not to disclose that the suspects were asylum seekers.
The reason? That familiar justification: “for fear of inflaming community tensions.”
It follows a near-identical incident in Portsmouth last month, when councillor George Madgwick told reporters the City Council CEO urged him not to disclose the asylum seeker background of another man accused of sexual assault.
The difference this time in Nuneaton: it was the police, not the council, who issued the hush order, fearing protests like those recently seen in Epping.
Warwickshire Police, led by Chief Constable Alex Franklin-Smith since September 2024, defended their decision, stating:
“Where relevant, sensitive information around locations, details of the crime and policing activity to catch offenders can be shared, with a warning that this is sensitive or confidential information and disclosure by those being briefed could affect future court hearings.”
But that justification doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.
When a motorist horrifically injured 65 people at a Liverpool FC victory parade in May, Merseyside Police revealed the suspect’s identity within two hours—including his race and nationality. He was a 53-year-old white British man.
Some praised that level of transparency.
Authorities insisted it was necessary to avoid repeating the mistakes of the Southport protests, where, they assert, a lack of timely information about the then-child murder suspect fuelled speculation and civil unrest.
The question is, why did Merseyside Police abide by the new policy but not Warwickshire? By their own admission, inflaming “community tensions” was a genuine fear—something this new transparency policy was made for.
Such inconsistency has unfortunately become a staple of British policing under the ever-growing influence of the College of Policing.
For context, Warwickshire Police has spent over £362,000 on “diversity posts”, according to an FOI response obtained by GB News in May.
Earlier this year, the force held VR classes showing boys educational films designed to “teach” them how “some of what they do and say” can negatively impact girls.
It was eerily reminiscent of the Adolescence-style propaganda we saw emerge from Netflix’s pseudo-fictional TV series.
In a statement on their website, the force said: “We want women and girls who live, work, socialise or study here in Warwickshire to be safe and to feel safe.”
Last November, they recorded a “non-crime hate incident” against a man who refused to shake hands following a disagreement about gender ideology.
We don’t know whether Franklin-Smith instructed his officers to tell councillors not to share information about Mulakhil and Kabir. Perhaps one of his senior officers acted on their own accord.
What we do know is that Warwickshire Police appears gripped by the same progressive ideology that has taken hold of forces across the country. One that routinely fails to protect the public from serious crime while inconsistently policing speech and protest.
Now, there’s another, deeper issue at play in the Nuneaton case. Something that touches on Labour’s plan to end hotel asylum seeker accommodation.
According to the Mail, both Mulakhil and Kabir were living in separate Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs) managed by Serco. These houses, just 70 yards apart, each housed around five asylum seekers.
Serco holds a £1.9 billion contract with the Home Office to provide this housing. Residents live rent-free, have their bills paid, and are provided with £49 per week in spending money, all taxpayer-funded.
Critics have warned that removing poorly vetted migrants from hotels, where security staff monitor entries and exits, and placing them in private housing will reduce oversight and increase the risk to the public.
It raises an uncomfortable question: do the hotels, flawed as they are, serve as a sort of barrier preventing the predators we’ve let in from more easily committing sexual assault?
You’re unlikely to commit crime when you’re surrounded by so many people.
According to the latest figures, over 32,000 asylum seekers were living in hotels as of March 2025, most of them men. Some reports put the figure at 72%.
The Home Office is already seeking male-only sites. There has been issues with mixed-sex hotels, with women and girls alleging that they were raped, sexually assaulted, and harassed.
Labour’s Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum, Dame Angela Eagle, announced plans in June to phase out hotel use in favour of “medium-sized” accommodation like old student halls and voided tower blocks.
It’s true that multiple asylum seekers have been convicted of sexual assault while housed in hotel accommodation, but the prospect of housing them in private accommodation en masse could become an even bigger issue.
While not all asylum seekers are placed in hotels upon arrival, many are, and it could be the case that Labour’s plan involves quickly placing them into these HMOs and private accommodation sites.
In short, under the new dispersal policy, the government could move hundreds of poorly vetted migrants in much closer proximity to the general public, to schools, to playgrounds, and in far less time.
No one takes pleasure in confronting this. We’re talking about alleged rape, the most heinous crime short of murder. Some would say its worse.
If the government had resettled a few hundred individuals, carefully vetted, properly monitored, and gradually integrated, we’d likely still face some issues, but nothing close to what we are now.
Despite foreign nationals making up just 9.3% of our population, they commit up to 23% of all sexual offences. For rapes last year, they were convicted of a quarter—a quarter. This is the Ministry of Justice’s own conviction data.
They (Conservative and Labour) brought in thousands upon thousands, often from deeply misogynistic cultures, with minimal checks and no serious plan for integration.
Now, they’re planning to house around 32,000 (almost definitely more given the secret Afghan resettlement scheme), in taxpayer-funded private homes, like HMOs, where they’ll be much closer to the general public.
It’s another ticking time bomb. And it’s why so many now say the only credible solution is deportation. It’s the price that must be paid for the sheer numbers and poor vetting.
Only on Sunday did we hear of yet another migrant being charged with rape. The Sudanese man, Edris Abdelrazig, allegedly attempted to kidnap the 10-year-old girl, almost inconceivably, while she was with her father.
These kinds of stories are emerging every week now.
*Update: Last night, we heard of another asylum seeker, this time from Pakistan, who appeared in court yesterday after being accused of repeatedly raping an 8-year-old girl between September 2024 and July 2025.
Do you believe our best days lie ahead?
Will you keep watching as our politicians and broadcasters push for yet more surveillance, censorship, and control?
If you want to push back—if not today, maybe someday—supporting independent journalism can (genuinely) make a real impact.
In the past year, The Stark Naked Brief reached over 120 million people on X. Sometimes, all it takes is one post—one uncomfortable truth—to wake someone up and put a dent the uniparty’s monopoly.
The dam is bursting on this subject, I think. Its about time, we all saw the under hand tactics by our great and good leaders…. They make me sick.
raja miah has much to say about the rape gangs check him out at recusant nine......as an aside and off topic be sure to check out and read carefully a petition on the uk government and parliament petition page...repeal the online safety act..it currently has 495,556, signatures it urgently needs many more and YOU can help in getting them first be sure to sign it and then and most importantly be sure to reshare it widely with as many like minded people as you possibly can and be sure to ask each one of them to do exactly the same as im asking you to do in this message...URGENT UPDATE it now has over half a million signatures in fact at the time of this post it currently has 500,532, signatures we must redouble our efforts to get many more