Man who drugged and raped wife found many men ‘whose fantasy is an unconscious woman’, court told

The case concerns alleged sexual abuse carried out over more than 20 years in a couple’s home. The husband has admitted multiple offences against his wife, including drugging, rape and sexual assault. The allegations matter because other men are accused of joining the abuse or helping arrange it.

The prosecution says the husband contacted men online, discussed drugs, shared images and invited some men to the house. Robert Stewart allegedly supplied medicines. David Graves allegedly supplied tablets in exchange for images. Philip Wild allegedly touched the woman while she was unconscious. Other defendants allegedly encouraged or helped arrange abuse.

Nine men are on trial at Manchester Minshull Street crown court. They are Robert Stewart, David Graves, Philip Wild, Daniel Rayner, Jordan Wallace, Alan Keelan, Jonathan Kirk, Mohammed Sabir and Richard Townsend. All those on trial deny the charges. Four other men have admitted offences connected with the abuse.

Drug-facilitated sexual assault involves sexual activity when a person’s ability to stay awake, understand events, resist or make a choice has been impaired by drugs or alcohol. It matters because an unconscious or severely impaired person cannot freely agree to sexual activity. The alleged use of drugs added planning and coordination to the abuse.

The court heard that the husband and Robert Stewart discussed date-rape drugs and drink spiking. Stewart allegedly gave him antidepressants and Tramadol. The husband also searched for information about GHB and sleeping tablets. David Graves allegedly supplied tablets, which the husband put into food, while Daniel Rayner allegedly discussed obtaining GHB.

The article describes these matters as prosecution allegations, not proven facts against the defendants. The husband has pleaded guilty to multiple offences. The men currently on trial deny the charges. Their cases will be decided by the court after evidence and legal directions.

The reported duration is unusually long: the husband pleaded guilty to multiple offences committed against his wife over more than 20 years. That time span matters because the allegations describe repeated abuse, changing contacts and continuing efforts to involve other men. The case is therefore about an alleged pattern, not one isolated incident.

The prosecution says the husband first met Robert Stewart on Craigslist in 2015. He later contacted other men, shared images, discussed drugs and arranged visits. The alleged contacts included David Graves, Philip Wild, Daniel Rayner and men connected through WhatsApp. Some allegedly had physical contact; others allegedly helped or encouraged the abuse without visiting.

Nine men are currently on trial for allegedly participating in the abuse or encouraging it online. They are Robert Stewart, David Graves, Philip Wild, Daniel Rayner, Jordan Wallace, Alan Keelan, Jonathan Kirk, Mohammed Sabir and Richard Townsend. Four other men have admitted offences, including three who admitted abusing the woman.

In this trial, the distinction turns on physical involvement. A contact offender is accused of directly touching or sexually abusing the woman. A non-contact offender is accused of assisting, encouraging or facilitating abuse without personally having sexual contact with her. Both types of conduct can be serious, but the alleged acts differ.

Philip Wild is described as having visited the home and touched the woman sexually while she was unconscious. By contrast, David Graves is described as a non-contact offender who allegedly supplied tablets in exchange for images. Daniel Rayner is also described as non-contact and allegedly requested images and discussed the possible supply of GHB.

The labels describe the prosecution’s account, not verdicts. Graves, Rayner and the other defendants currently on trial deny the charges. The article also states that Karl Lindsay pleaded guilty to non-contact offences, while three other men admitted abusing the woman. The court will determine each defendant’s responsibility separately.

Consent is a person’s free and informed agreement to sexual activity. An unconscious person cannot understand what is happening, choose whether to participate or communicate a decision. A heavily intoxicated person may also lack the ability to understand the act, weigh choices or communicate freely. In either situation, apparent stillness or lack of resistance is not agreement.

The article alleges that the husband and others targeted the woman when she was unconscious or unable to consent. Louise Oakley KC told the court that Philip Wild knew the woman was not conscious and could not consent. The prosecution also described discussions about drugs intended to knock her out completely.

This principle is central to the trial, but the verdicts have not been decided. The husband has pleaded guilty to multiple offences. The nine men currently on trial deny the charges, and the court must assess the evidence about what each person knew and did. The article does not set out the precise legal directions given to the jury.

Physical contact is not always required for criminal responsibility. A person may be prosecuted for helping another person commit sexual offences, encouraging the conduct, arranging access, supplying drugs or sharing sexual images. The exact offence depends on the jurisdiction, the evidence and what the person intended or knew. Conviction and sentence are decided by a court.

The article gives several alleged examples. David Graves was described as a non-contact offender who supplied tablets in exchange for images. Daniel Rayner allegedly requested images and discussed obtaining GHB. Other men allegedly encouraged abuse online. Karl Lindsay has pleaded guilty to non-contact offences, showing that the case includes alleged criminal conduct without physical contact.

The article does not list every charge or possible sentence. It states that nine men deny the charges and that four others have admitted offences. Prosecutors still need to prove the relevant legal elements for each defendant. Arranging or discussing abuse alone does not establish guilt without evidence of the required conduct and mental state.

Courts determine knowledge from the evidence surrounding the alleged event. They may consider what the accused was told, what they observed, their messages, preparations, actions and relationship with other participants. The question is whether the legal test for knowledge or awareness is proved. The precise test and meaning of “should have known” depend on the offence and jurisdiction.

The prosecution says Philip Wild was told to stay quiet so he would not wake the woman and should step onto the landing if she stirred. Louise Oakley KC said he was fully aware that the woman was not conscious and could not consent. The prosecution also says Daniel Rayner knew she was unaware and was being sexually abused.

These are allegations presented in court, not findings of guilt. The jury must consider all evidence about each defendant separately. Messages, arrangements, drug discussions and conduct may be relevant, but the article does not describe the complete evidence or the judge’s legal directions. The men on trial deny the charges.