Brighton men jailed for drink-spiking rape

    Brighton men jailed for drink-spiking rape

    Photo from the BBC


    On 30th April 2015 three men were convicted of rape at Hove Crown Court and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment between six and nine years.



    “Doorman Rani Mishrigi and two unemployed men, Kurlos Ramzi and Hany Mohamed, were found guilty of rape after a trial at Hove Crown Court”. It seems that three of the men had plied the victim with alcohol, some of which had been laced with drugs.

    As a result of this, the victim had lost her capacity to consent to sexual activity. There was a trial, which was presumably on the issue of whether or not the victim could give consent, and the jury disbelieved the three men.



    The men were sentenced as follows :

    • Rani Mishrigi – 6 years
    • Kurlos Ramzi – 7 years
    • Hany Mohamed – 9 years

    The starting points would have been taken from the Sentencing Council’s Guidelines for Sexual Offences (see page 9). It would appear to be a Category 3A offence, which gives a starting point of 7 years and a range of 6-9 years (which you can see is the range for these three defendants).

    The obvious question is why did the three men get different sentences? It isn’t clear from the news reports. In some ways, you would think that the doorman, being someone who was in a position of trust, would be in line for the higher sentence.

    At this stage, we don’t know what the differences were, but they could be the different roles that the men played, or their different criminal history.

    We would not expect an appeal to be successful however – this was an experienced Judge, and the sentences were in the correct range. An appeal on the basis of ‘disparity’ between different defendants is unlikely to succeed, as although they were convicted of the same offence, they have different histories and may have played different roles.

    Dan is a barrister at 2 Dr. Johnson’s Buildings practising in crime.


    1. We don’t even know whether Mishrigi used his position of trust; if it was not at the club or whatever where he was doorman it is irrelevant.

      But as you say he may have had a clean record and the others not. Being a doorman is not like being a teacher or a medical professional where the breach of trust is much more serious.