Former US government adviser who flew to UK to rape ‘nine-year-old girl' jailed
A former US government adviser who flew to the UK to rape who he believed to be a nine-year-old child has been jailed, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has said.
Rahamim Shy, 47, travelled to Bedfordshire from New York in February last year to have sex with the girl after more than a month of planning involving messages with an individual posing as a woman called 'Debbie', the girl's grandmother.
Unbeknown to Shy, Debbie was in fact an undercover Bedfordshire police officer and the child did not exist.
Shy, of Jersey City in New Jersey, was found guilty of arranging the commission of a child sex offence, namely rape, and possessing indecent photographs of a child, at Luton Crown Court on Wednesday, the CPS said.
Using an online forum and messaging apps, Shy described in detail disturbing acts he wanted to do to the girl and said he was prepared to travel to England to do so.
He described the child's age of nine as a 'tad late' to start sexual activity, and said it was an 'honour' to be considered 'her first'.
Shy, an international investment banker, flew from the US to Gatwick Airport on February 23 2024 before driving to Bedford where he met the undercover officer and was arrested.
Upon arrest, officers found cuddly toys and condoms in his luggage which the prosecution argued demonstrated a clear intent to win the child over before abusing her.
At court, the jury heard bad character evidence from Shy's phone including indecent images of children and messages in which he discussed his sexual interest in children.
The fact the child in this case did not exist makes no difference, and it is a credit to the police operation and subsequent prosecution that Shy will no longer pose an immediate threat
Lorraine Telford, Crown Prosecution Service
He was sentenced to 11 years and six months in prison on Wednesday.
Lorraine Telford, of the Crown Prosecution Service, said: 'Rahamim Shy is a predator who was fully prepared to commit unspeakable acts against a child for his own sexual gratification.
'It was clear from his explicit conversations and items he brought to England that he had only one intention, to commit rape against what he knew was a vulnerable child.
'The fact the child in this case did not exist makes no difference, and it is a credit to the police operation and subsequent prosecution that Shy will no longer pose an immediate threat.'
Before the trial, the defence argued that because Shy was in the US at the time of the messaging, he was jurisdictionally exempt from prosecution, the CPS said.
However, the prosecution successfully argued that English courts have the jurisdiction to try offences committed abroad that are intended to result in criminal offences in England.
He was found not guilty of possessing a prohibited image of a child.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
8 hours ago
- Spectator
Has deporting illegals become illegal?
The circus around Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia – whose full name the New York Times likes to trot out as if citing an old-school English aristocrat – speaks volumes about the immigration battle roiling the US. Our friend Kilmar is what we fuddy-duddies insist on calling an illegal immigrant. The Salvadoran crossed clandestinely into the US in 2012. As for what he's done since, that depends on whom you ask. According to his GoFundMe page, Kilmar is a 'husband, union worker and father of a disabled five-year-old'. Left-wing media portray 'the Maryland man' – a tag akin to Axel Rudakubana's 'a Welshman' – as an industrious metalworker devoted to his family. His wife has rowed back on the temporary protective order she once requested, claiming she'd been over-cautious. Yet according to the Trump administration, Kilmar is a member of the notoriously violent street gang MS-13 who's derived his primary source of income from smuggling hundreds of illegals over the southern border for several years. Choose A or B. In 2019, Kilmar was arrested for loitering along with three other men, one a suspected MS-13 member. He was carrying marijuana, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. From his clothing, tattoos and, more persuasively, a 'past proven and reliable' confidential source who verified he was an active gang member using the moniker 'Chele', police adjudged that Kilmar was a gangbanger, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. He was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement – whose acronym, ICE, reinforces its rep as cold-hearted – which moved to deport him. Kilmar (of course) contested his removal. The immigration judge hearing Kilmar's case concurred that the defendant was indeed a gang member and deportable; the Salvadoran (of course) appealed the decision, which nevertheless was upheld. Kilmar (of course) then filed for asylum, as well as for a 'withholding of removal'. A subsequent immigration judge stayed his deportation to his home country, where his wellbeing might be endangered by local gangs. Now, you might suppose that putting yourself in the way of other famously rivalrous gangs would come with the territory when you join one yourself. Like, inter-gang violence seems a natural hazard of this line of work. But it's not only British immigration judges who are soft touches. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the millions of gate-crashers Kilmar (of course) remained in the US. In 2022, he was pulled over for speeding while driving eight other Hispanic men of uncertain immigration status in an SUV altered to add a third row of seats for extra passengers. The officers suspected human-trafficking; Kilmar's driving licence had expired; a run of his number plate through the database turned up a federal note on likely membership of MS-13. Yet when the patrolmen contacted the feds, ICE (of course) declined to pick him up. So Kilmar was (of course) released without charge. Even so, his claim that he was merely transporting construction workers between jobs did not, under investigation, hold up. Fast-forward to 2025 and why this otherwise obscure Salvadoran who is or is not a thug merits such a detailed lowdown. Meaning (of course) that this case has to do with Donald Trump – whose evil minions in March flew more than 230 purported criminals to a Salvadoran prison, including none other than Kilmar, whom ICE did finally pick up (no 'of course' there). The flights' timing was judicially dodgy. The planes did or didn't take off after a federal judge ruled that the flights could not proceed until the deportees were given the opportunity to challenge their removal. The administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which directed Trump to 'facilitate' Kilmar's return to the US. Because, remember, there was only one country to which he could not be deported because of that credulous 2019 decision: his own. Hence the Justice Department's acceptance that Kilmar's deportation was an 'administrative error'. During this proxy war with Trump, Democrats have pretended to hair-tear over poor Kilmar, mouldering away in a nasty foreign prison and deprived of due process. But the story I just laid out has due process, not to mention leniency or even dereliction on the part of the authorities, up the wazoo. Meanwhile, after slyly getting their jurisprudential ducks in a row, last week Trump and co finally got Kilmar flown back to the US, only to arrest him immediately for human-trafficking – with every intention of convicting the guy and then deporting him right back to El Salvador. What do we make of this farce? The American commentariat has focused on a potential showdown between Trump and the judiciary, claiming to fear a flat-out executive refusal to follow court orders but secretly rather hoping that Trump does defy the courts and thus reveals himself as an unconstitutional tyrant. I view this absurd tale through a different lens. All these trials and flights for a lone illegal alien are expensive. The amount of 'due process' the American justice system affords every single illegal makes deportation at any scale impossible. There isn't enough time and money and there aren't nearly enough judges to make any but a token gesture toward the mass deportation of illegals that Trump has promised. That amounts to a victory not just for Democrats but also for disorder. I'd assess the odds that Kilmar is a thug at about 90 per cent. But proving membership of unofficial allegiances in court is a bastard. If every individual deportation case must be adjudicated according to exacting evidentiary rules and appeal procedures, America's drastic, undemocratic demographic change will proceed inexorably. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the staggering ten million gate-crashers during the Biden administration alone. What are the chances of that? In New York at the weekend, ICE raids were impeded by LA-style crowds of righteously indignant protestors screaming: 'Let them go! Let them go!' The officers just doing their jobs looked beleaguered, tired, numb and pre-defeated. After all the ICE agents' thankless labours, what proportion of their detainees will still get to stay in the country in the end? I'll take another stab at 90 per cent.
BBC News
11 hours ago
- BBC News
Sussex Police officer charged with sexually assaulting four women
A Sussex Police officer has been charged with sexually assaulting four an investigation, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) authorised that PC Ryan Busby, 25, be charged with four counts of sexual assault by touching, police incidents are alleged to have happened with four women known to him on 20 December 2024 while Mr Busy was off will appear at Guildford Magistrates' Court on 8 July. The force says Mr Busy is suspended from Police explained that the matter was referred to the Independent Office of Police Conduct, which instructed that a local investigation by the force's professional standards department should be carried out.
Daily Mirror
13 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Al-Qaeda inspired student who stabbed Labour MP can be freed from prison
Roshonara Choudhry has been cleared for release by the Parole Board after being jailed for 15 years for trying to murder Labour minister Stephen Timms after being radicalised online A student who tried to murder Labour minister Stephen Timms after being radicalised online has been cleared for release from prison. Roshonara Choudhry, then 21, was jailed for life for a minimum of 15 years for stabbing Sir Stephen twice in the stomach in 2010. The attack on the now social security minister is thought to be the first al Qaida-inspired attempt to assassinate a politician on British soil. Mr Timms, 69, has revealed Choudhry had written to him several times from jail. In a previous interview, he explained: "In the third of them, she says she's sorry about what happened. " So we're in a restorative justice process which may lead to me meeting her before she's released. I'd welcome that." Weeks before the attack on May 14, 2010, Choudhry had quit her English degree course at King's College London, where she had been expected to get a first. She became radicalised after watching online sermons by terror preachers and decided to kill Sir Stephen because he supported the Iraq war. The student knifed her local MP as he held a constituency surgery at the Beckton Globe community centre in east London. Choudhry smiled and pretended she was going to shake hands with him before repeatedly plunging the blade into her victim. After she was arrested she told detectives the stabbing was "punishment" and "to get revenge for the people of Iraq". But after a Parole Board hearing last month, a panel decided she could be freed from jail. A decision summary said: "After considering the circumstances of her offending, the progress made while in custody and the evidence presented at the hearing and in the dossier, the panel was satisfied that imprisonment was no longer necessary for the protection of the public." The document said that at the time of the attempted murder, Choudhry, now 36, had risk factors of problems with family relationships, development of extreme beliefs and willingness to use violence to address perceived injustices. But she had engaged in programmes in prison to understand how her extreme beliefs developed and her conduct was described as "exemplary". The summary added: "Ms Choudhry was assessed as having shown a very high level of insight and understanding of herself. "She had consistently shown over many years that she no longer held the same beliefs, that she was able to manage her emotional wellbeing effectively and she would no longer be likely to be influenced by other people with strong negative views, having developed the ability to critically evaluate information and to seek help from professionals if she needs it." The document said the panel did not receive a victim impact statement, or representations from the justice secretary. It was recommended that Choudhry be released on licence under conditions such as living at a designated address, with a specific curfew and subject to an exclusion zone to avoid contact with Sir Stephen. A Parole Board spokesman said: "Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community. "Parole reviews are undertaken thoroughly and with extreme care. Protecting the public is our number one priority."
