logo
Moment man 'posing as an Uber driver to sexually assault vulnerable woman' is stopped by police who found 'rape kit' in his car

Moment man 'posing as an Uber driver to sexually assault vulnerable woman' is stopped by police who found 'rape kit' in his car

Daily Mail​a day ago

Shocking footage shows the moment police stopped a man after he was accused of posing as an Uber driver to sexually assault a vulnerable young woman.
Graham Head, 66, of Pevensey, East Sussex, was pulled over and had his vehicle searched after the 25-year-old woman gave police part of a car numberplate.
Officers say they found latex gloves, condoms, Viagra tablets, and a balaclava in Head's silver Mercedes estate.
The woman told police she got into the car after the driver said he was an Uber at the end of his shift and offered her a free ride home in the early hours of November 18, 2022.
Seconds after fighting off the man she said attacked her, the young woman read the numberplate before the car drove off.
After screaming for help, she told a 999 operator she had been attacked by a man in latex gloves and a covid mask who was the driver of a car with registration staring L21.
A police patrol spotted a car near the scene and officers spoke to Head, 68, at the roadside in Brighton after two cars pulled him over.
On body-worn camera video played to the jury, he is asked if he has had any interaction with a female in the minutes before he was stopped.
Head told police through a blue covid face mask: 'No, I haven't.
'I'm going back to Pevensey.'
Officers tell Head his personalised registration matches a partial numberplate given by the 25-year-old woman minutes before.
He tells police: 'Definitely not me, no.'
As he is speaking, police decide to search his car with the personalised numberplate L21 GRH.
This is when they say they discovered latex gloves, viagra, condoms and a balaclava in his vehicle.
Head later told police he picked the woman up near Brighton seafront and drove her to Hove. He said she looked worse for wear.
'I know I haven't done it. If I took her to the correct address, that's not kidnapping. I never said to her I was an Uber driver, I've never said that ever.
'I asked her if she wanted me to get her an Uber. She happily got in the car. I did not sexually assault that lady, I didn't,' Graham Head told police.
He said he did not realise they were trying to pull him over when the patrol car followed him.
PC Richard Harris said he used his blue lights, headlights and siren.
'I didn't see anything that indicated he was going to pull over,' PC Harris said.
Police asked him why he had condoms and viagra in his car.
'I'm a normal red blooded male,' he said.
Head told police he had been in Brighton on his own to hear live music in November 2022.
He was driving with a covid mask on when they pulled him over.
Graham Head denies attacking two women in August and November 2022.
Head is accused of kidnapping, attempted rape, and sexual assault of a 25-year old woman, along with assault by penetration and sexual assault of a 19-year-old woman - all of which he denies.
The two women told police they were attacked by him in Brighton in August and November 2022.
He claims that he offered the 25-year-old a lift home but did not touch her and never met his other alleged victim.
On June 2, the first day of his trial, jurors at Lewes Crown Court were told Head was a 'sexual predator' who 'slipped up' the night he was arrested by police.
Opening the case, Paul Jarvis KC said: 'The defendant is a sexual predator. Basing himself in Pevensey and ostensibly working as an unofficial Uber driver or taxi driver.
'He was also looking for vulnerable young women who he could sexually abuse.
'He carried Viagra and condoms with him, either on his person or in his car, as well as latex gloves. He would use the latex gloves to minimise the risk of leaving traces of his DNA on his victims.'
Head had two mobile phones and was 'savvy enough' to know that if he kept them on while he was driving, the network provider could record his movements so kept them in flight mode while he was searching for victims, the court heard.
The two attacks are said to have taken place in the early hours of August 19 2022 in Hove Park and November 18 2022 outside the alleged victim's home.
Mr Jarvis said the first victim, who was 19 years was 'intoxicated and vulnerable' when she was sexually assaulted by the defendant in Hove Park.'
He said the second victim, aged 25, was also vulnerable and intoxicated in the early hours of the morning when Head kidnapped her and sexually assaulted her in his car and then drove off leaving her distressed on the roadside.
On both occasions the defendant was driving his grey Mercedes estate motor vehicle with the registration number L21 GRH, the prosecutor said.
The 25-year-old was able to remember the 'L21' portion of the number plate which led to police pulling Head's car over and arresting him the same night, jurors were told.
Mr Jarvis said: 'He slipped up on November 19 2022 in two respects.
'First because his victim was alert enough to be able to memorise part of the licence plate for the police to be able to identify his car when they saw it.
The 25-year-old had been on a night out and had consumed alcohol and cocaine, the court heard.
She said a man pulled up alongside her and told her he was an Uber driver who had just finished his shift but would give her a free ride home.
Journeys from Middle Street, in Brighton, where the victim left Monarch Bar, to the victim's home address were found after analysis of the satnav in Head's Mercedes, the court heard.
Mr Jarvis said: 'He saw (the victim) in the early hours of the morning on November 18 2022, he realised that she was vulnerable and intoxicated.
'He offered to give her a life home but his real plan was to drive around until he was satisfied she was fast asleep so he could sexually assault and rape her.
'He drove close to her home address and tried to rape her in the back seat of his car but she came to and kicked him away.'
The 25-year-old has since died and will not give evidence in this trial.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EXCLUSIVE My tenant from hell left my £4m Belgravia home in ruins after changing the locks, dumping my possessions in a garage and secretly subletting it to football fans on Booking.com
EXCLUSIVE My tenant from hell left my £4m Belgravia home in ruins after changing the locks, dumping my possessions in a garage and secretly subletting it to football fans on Booking.com

Daily Mail​

time18 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE My tenant from hell left my £4m Belgravia home in ruins after changing the locks, dumping my possessions in a garage and secretly subletting it to football fans on Booking.com

A trusting pensioner's £4million Belgravia home was wrecked after a tenant changed the locks and secretly sublet the property to droves of tourists on booking sites. The four-bedroom London pad has been owned by Anabel Loyd's family for over three decades, and more recently the 69-year-old's mother decided to officially hand her the home. After renting it out to family 'here and there', as well as a successful stint hiring it out as an AirBnB to various tourists, the Wiltshire woman decided to turn the property into long-term let due to 'slower periods during the winter'. A family friend worked for Foxtons estate agents so she decided to go ahead with the firm, and soon a potential tenant emerged hoping for a two-year contract, which the 69-year-old accepted with break clauses, and a rent of £1,600-a-week. They passed all of the estate agents checks, so Ms Loyd assumed all was well - but things started to go wrong almost immediately. Upon moving into the home, the tenant claimed it was 'inhabitable' because of black marks on the windows despite a deep clean being carried out by the estate agents, according to Ms Loyd. But the problems didn't end there, as the tenant changed the property's locks, dumped droves of Ms Loyd's items into a garage he shouldn't have had access to and began to rent the house out on Ms Loyd told MailOnline: 'I was completely furious. [The tenant] was subletting to huge numbers of people and they would go to the pub for a drink, so the people in the pub, who are truly wonderful, knew exactly what was going on. 'There were all these people going and kind of minibuses of people arriving, I mean, sort of 12 people at a time in a house which isn't terribly big, I mean you could have perhaps fitted eight at a pinch. 'The house, meanwhile, has clearly, progressively been disintegrating.' 'My language on the subject has been truly spectacular. I really felt like going round and smashing my own front windows so that they couldn't let it anymore. 'I was flabbergasted, and very bad tempered. It so bizarre that you almost are laughing about it too because you can't quite believe it is possible. She added: 'It is like having your house burgled, you feel everything is sort of dirty, in a strange way.' 'I wish I could say when I visit for the first time that I will be standing there in floods of tears, but I will be standing there in a tiring fury.' And although her property is currently in the hands of another, a tenant subletting a property without permission is usually considered a civil matter, rather than a criminal one. Recalling the moment she was told of hordes of unassuming Wigan supporters were descending on her home with crates of lager, she added: 'You do end up laughing because you can't believe it. 'And I have nothing against Wigan supporters at all.' On the property advertised by Ms Loyd's tenant as 'Regal Haven Four Bed Home Near Buckingham Palace' Luckily, her local publican and neighbours alerted her to the 'minibuses' of tourists packing into her property, which she said could only fit around seven or eight people 'at a pinch'. After briefly searching online, she quickly found her 'unprincipled' tenant had been advertising her home via describing it as a 'regal haven', boasting a 9.3 rating out of 10. And although to find her home on offer to strangers was 'salt to the wound', a string of images showing the damage to the property was 'the straw that broke the camel's back.' 'The sort of straw in the camels back was a US couple who had stayed at the property contacting us,' she said. 'There was dirty laundry, the doorknobs were falling off, a hole in the front door, and the three-foot high weeds in the backyard.' Ms Loyd estimates she would have lost £20,000 in costs after repairing her home, a stone's throw away from Buckingham Palace, as she would have to re-carpet, repaint and more. 'Its accumulative damage and mainly cosmetic, but living in London, anything like that costs a lot of money to get. 'I know I am lucky to live somewhere else, and to have another home, but this is a story of when s**t hits the fan.' 'It doesn't really make it any better. all the same.' And to add insult to injury, her tenant had also piled her possessions in the garage. Ms Loyd also argued they shouldn't have had access to this part of her home, as the author feared some of belongings may be damaged. 'There may be some things that would be of a certain value that would be very difficult to replace. 'Some things you can't rectify if they are really damaged as opposed to paintwork.' While she echoed concerns for books belonging to her husband's family, her main worry was for a painting of her beloved late pet. 'If they smash the picture of my late dog , I will wrangle somebody, because I just really mind about it. I mean, it's a pet long since gone.' she added. And although she says Foxtons have offered to return the deposit and commission fee, she doesn't think it will touch the sides on repairs as well as money spent on renting - which includes a £499.20 a month management fee to the estate agents. She added: 'The truth is had this been anywhere other than a small mews where everybody knows everybody business. 'It it wasn't for the local pub, no one would have known. From that point of view the tenant picked the wrong place for this sort of thing.' She added: 'I think I would only consider renting to someone who was not to me or at least people I know in future.' In light of her ordeal, Ms Loyd urged others to 'do their homework' when letting their properties, saying: 'Really press any agent before you let them let do something.' It is understood Foxtons had been in contact with the tenant 12 times between April and May, having also issued him with a Section 8 during this time. It is also understood the tenant has now signed a Deed of Surrender, a formal written agreement to end a tenancy earlier, and has until July 14 to vacate the property.

Major high street retailers duping shoppers with ‘misleading discounts' on pricey TVs, Which? warns
Major high street retailers duping shoppers with ‘misleading discounts' on pricey TVs, Which? warns

The Sun

timean hour ago

  • The Sun

Major high street retailers duping shoppers with ‘misleading discounts' on pricey TVs, Which? warns

SHOPPERS looking for a new television may want to think twice before trusting the discounts advertised by some of the UK's biggest retailers. An investigation by consumer champion Which? has revealed questionable pricing practices at Currys, Very, and other major sellers, potentially misleading customers into believing they are getting better deals than they actually are. 1 Which? analysed over 1,600 television deals across five retailers. More than half (56%) of the "was" prices used in promotions were not the most recent prices charged before the discount. Which? said this tactic can create the illusion of massive savings when, in reality, the higher price may not have been charged for months – or was only briefly in place. Plus, four in 10 TVs (40%) had a "was" price that was only in effect for less time than the discounted price. And a third of all the TVs reviewed (33%) were doubly misleading, with both intervening prices and promotional periods longer than the higher "was" price. Which? said the findings are concerning because UK consumer protection guidance states that a "was" price must represent the genuine price immediately prior to the discount. Retailers that dodge these rules risk enforcement action from authorities such as the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). Lisa Webb, Which? consumer law expert, said: "Shoppers deserve clear, honest pricing - not smoke and mirrors. "If retailers are using dodgy was/now discounts to create the illusion of a bargain then we expect the competition regulator to take enforcement action. 'Anyone in the market for a new TV or any other expensive purchase should take any such discounts with a pinch of salt and check price tracking sites like CamelCamelCamel or Price Runner to ensure they are getting a genuine deal before making a decision." Shopping discounts - How to make savings and find the best bargains Which retailers were the worst offenders? Very emerged as the worst offender in the Which? investigation. Of the 399 TV deals reviewed, nearly nine in 10 (87%) used "was" prices that were not the most recent, and over half (53%) had higher prices that were in place for less time than the promotional price. For example, the LG OLED65B46LA 65-inch TV was advertised with a "was" price of £2,499 and a "now" price of £1,499. However, the £2,499 price hadn't been charged for five months and had been replaced by seven lower price points during that time. Currys also came under fire, with three-quarters (75%) of its 608 TV deals featuring outdated "was" prices. Plus, it had the highest rate (68%) of TVs where the higher price applied for a shorter time than the discounted price. An example includes the LG UT73 50-inch TV, which had a "was" price of £399.99 and a "now" price of £299.99. The higher price had only been in place for 25 days, compared to 207 days at the lower price. What about other retailers? While AO was also found to use intervening prices in a third (33%) of its deals, it provides transparency by publishing the dates of its "was" prices and acknowledging that lower prices may have applied. This makes AO's deals less likely to mislead shoppers, Which? said. Argos performed the best, with nearly all of its "was" prices reflecting the price immediately before the promotion, offering customers a more accurate picture of potential savings. Amazon's pricing practices were also reviewed, but the retailer uses a different approach. Its "was" prices reflect the median price paid by customers over the past 90 days, excluding promotional offers. While this is a distinct method, Which? has concerns that it could still confuse shoppers and make discounts appear larger than they are. Which? also revealed earlier this week that Sports Direct shoppers are being misled by deceptive pricing tactics, creating the illusion of bargain deals. How to compare prices to get the best deal JUST because something is on offer, or is part of a sale, it doesn't mean it's always a good deal. There are plenty of comparison websites out there that'll check prices for you - so don't be left paying more than you have to. Most of them work by comparing the prices across hundreds of retailers. Here are some that we recommend: Google Shopping is a tool that lets users search for and compare prices for products across the web. Simply type in keywords, or a product number, to bring up search results. Price Spy logs the history of how much something costs from over 3,000 different retailers, including Argos, Amazon, eBay and the supermarkets. Once you select an individual product you can quickly compare which stores have the best price and which have it in stock. Idealo is another website that lets you compare prices between retailers. All shoppers need to do is search for the item they need and the website will rank them from the cheapest to the most expensive one. CamelCamelCamel only works on goods being sold on Amazon. To use it, type in the URL of the product you want to check the price of.

Dem forcibly removed & handcuffed at LA protests news conference as he tried to confront Trump official over ICE arrests
Dem forcibly removed & handcuffed at LA protests news conference as he tried to confront Trump official over ICE arrests

The Sun

timean hour ago

  • The Sun

Dem forcibly removed & handcuffed at LA protests news conference as he tried to confront Trump official over ICE arrests

A CALIFORNIA Democrat has been thrown out of an LA protests news conference and handcuffed in a dramatic scene as he tried to confront Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. Wild video shows the moment cops shoved Sen. Alex Padilla out of the room and forced him to the ground. 7 7 7 7 7 7 "I have questions for the secretary," Padilla could be heard saying in the stunning footage. "Because a fact of the matter is, a half a dozen violent criminals that are rotating on your ..." he said before being cut off and pushed out of the room. Padilla was shoved into a nearby hallway and told to put his hands behind his back before being handcuffed. His office said he's no longer detained. Noem was asked about the outburst during the live news conference and she said Padilla did not ask for a meeting with her. 'I think everybody in America would agree that that was inappropriate,' she said. Padilla's office claimed he was just trying to ask the secretary a question. California Governor Gavin Newsom was quick to capitalize on the drama, writing, "If they can handcuff a U.S. Senator for asking a question, imagine what they will do to you." President Donald Trump and Newsom have engaged in a war of words since Trump intervened and sent federal troops to the protests in downtown Los Angeles against Newsom's wishes. Newsom attacked Trump's mental fitness - echoing the harsh criticism former President Joe Biden faced about his ability to lead as he finished his time in the White House. Newsom's attacks come after Trump claimed he spoke to Newsom on the phone earlier this week - but the governor insisted they last spoke to each other on Friday. "It honestly starts to disturb me on another level - maybe he actually believes he said those things and he's not all there," Newsom said on Thursday's episode of the New York Times' political podcast The Daily. He told Fox station KTTV, "He is not the same person that I dealt with just four years ago, and he's incapable of even a train of thought. He's lost it." Trump has repeatedly blasted his West Coast rival as "incompetent" and blamed him for "third world lawlessness" in the protests. In response to Newsom daring border czar Tom Homan to arrest him, Trump said on Monday he 'would do it if I were Tom.' The president has now deployed 4,000 members of the National Guard and 700 Marine Corps to Los Angeles to try and restore peace. While the troops aren't allowed to arrest citizens, they can temporarily detain them until cops arrive to arrest them. ICE has been accused of having a heavy-handed approach to Trump's immigration policy including wrongly detaining US citizens. The Trump administration has made it clear that despite the nationwide protests, they will continue to rid the US of illegal immigrant offenders. Following California's lead, Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced he was deploying over 7,000 troops across the state after protests turned tense in Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio over the weekend. Trump has now vowed to crack down on the growing demonstrations with more force than ever. The president is believed to be readying ICE tactical units to storm New York City, Seattle, Chicago, Philadelphia, and northern Virginia, MSNBC reports. Most demonstrations against Trump's deportation program have remained largely peaceful. But speaking at the 250th anniversary of the US Army on Tuesday, Trump said, "The mob in Los Angeles will not deter us." 7 9th Jun 2025, 07:14 By Georgie English What is the US National Guard? THE US National Guard is a reserve military force made up of part-time service members who typically hold civilian jobs but can be activated for federal or state duty. Each state, territory, and the District of Columbia has its own National Guard, which can be mobilized by the state governor or the President. Can the President call the National Guard for local matters? Yes, but with limits. Normally, governors deploy their state's National Guard to handle local emergencies like natural disasters, protests, or civil unrest. The President can federalize the National Guard under specific laws, such as the Insurrection Act. This allows them to respond to domestic unrest if it's deemed beyond the capacity of local or state authorities. When federalized, National Guard troops operate under presidential command rather than the governor's. While it's unusual, a president can deploy the National Guard into a state without a governor's consent if certain legal thresholds are met. These typically involve threats to federal property, national security, or widespread breakdowns in public order. However, such actions are often politically and legally controversial. By Trump vs California Despite the carnage flooding the streets, California's government has said they have the situation under control. Governor Gavin Newsom even accused Trump of "inflaming tensions" by deploying the National Guard. The pair have a long history of heated disputes over policy. Newsom formerly requested Trump remove the guard members, which he called a "serious breach of state sovereignty". Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass added the arrival of troops is a "dangerous escalation". She said: "We do not want to play in to the [Trump] administration's hands." "What we're seeing in Los Angeles is chaos provoked by the administration." Trump fired back at California's government as he called them "incompetent". Newsom and Trump reportedly spoke for 40 minutes by phone on Saturday, though details of their conversation have not been disclosed. The deployment of troops marks the first time in six decades that a state's National Guard was activated without a request from its governor, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store