Husband in Mass Rape Trial Submits Witness Statement as Case Against 12 Co-Defendants Nears Opening

A man who admitted to drugging and raping his wife over a period spanning more than two decades has provided a lengthy witness statement detailing his version of events, a jury at a Manchester court has been told. The disclosure marks the latest development in a case that has drawn widespread attention for its scale and the prolonged nature of the abuse.

The husband, who is in his sixties and lives in the Stockport area of Greater Manchester, cannot be named for legal reasons designed to protect his wife's right to anonymity. He had originally denied the allegations against him but changed his plea last month, admitting to 60 separate offences. These include charges of rape and administering a substance with intent—a charge that reflects the deliberate drugging of the victim without her knowledge.

The case first came before Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court in early September, when a jury was formally sworn in. However, proceedings have since been repeatedly delayed for a combination of legal and practical reasons, preventing the prosecution case from getting fully underway.

In addition to the abuse he inflicted personally, the husband had also faced accusations of inviting 13 other men to abuse his wife. According to the source material, these alleged offences took place between 2018 and November 2025. The timeline indicates a sustained pattern of criminal conduct spanning many years.

On the most recent court date, the nine women and three men of the jury, along with two female reserve jurors, were invited into the courtroom. They received an update from Judge Maurice Greene regarding the status of the case and the reasons for the ongoing delays.

Judge Greene explained that the husband has now produced a statement about what he says happened. He described the document as a "long statement" that has been disclosed to all defence counsel and contains "a lot of detail." The judge further noted that it comprises "lots of pages and lots of documents," and that lawyers involved in the case are "going through it carefully." That review process, he indicated, remains ongoing.

The jury had already been informed at an earlier hearing that the husband had admitted to the 60 offences and would therefore no longer stand trial as a defendant. His guilty pleas removed him from the roster of those facing a jury, but his statement now introduces a substantial new piece of evidence that the remaining defendants and their legal teams must scrutinise.

One co-defendant, 59-year-old Keith Fotheringham from Dundee, Scotland, has also entered guilty pleas to several offences, according to the source. Fotheringham's admissions mean he, too, will not be part of the upcoming trial.

The remaining 12 men are still set to face trial, and the prosecution case against them is scheduled to open on Monday, 19 October. The jury was asked to return on that date. The defendants are a geographically diverse group, with addresses spanning Greater Manchester, Cheshire, Rochdale, Somerset, Kent, and Derbyshire. Their ages range from 28 to 74.

The named defendants are: Philip Wild, 58, from Stockport; Sean Peers, 38, from Stockport; Jordan Wallace, 31, from Manchester; Alan Keelan, 42, from Manchester; Jonathan Kirk, 43, from Stockport; Robert Stewart, 70, from Stockport; Mohammed Sabir, 28, of no fixed abode; Graham Brougham, 74, from Northwich, Cheshire; Richard Townsend, 37, from Rochdale; Karl Lindsay, 55, from Taunton, Somerset; Daniel Rayner, 42, from Whitstable, Kent; and David Graves, 59, from Ilkeston, Derbyshire.

The case has been listed under the BBC News topic of violence against women, reflecting its broader significance in ongoing public conversations about domestic abuse, consent, and the use of drugs to facilitate sexual offences. The fact that the abuse allegedly continued for more than 20 years, and was only interrupted by legal intervention, raises questions about how such prolonged offending can go undetected.

Legal commentators note that cases involving the secret administration of drugs to facilitate rape present particular challenges for prosecutors. Victims are often unaware that they have been assaulted until evidence emerges through other means, such as a police investigation or a disclosure by a third party. In this instance, the husband's admission of 60 offences represents a significant volume of criminal conduct concentrated within a single domestic relationship.

The judge's decision to inform the jury about the husband's witness statement, while emphasising that lawyers need time to review it, underscores the complexity of managing a multi-defendant trial with a large volume of evidence. The statement is expected to form part of the material that both the prosecution and the defence will examine as they prepare for the trial of the remaining 12 men.

For the wife, whose identity is protected by law, the process continues to unfold in a public courtroom. The delays, while frustrating, are often necessary in cases of this magnitude to ensure that all evidence is properly considered and that the defendants receive a fair trial.

The trial is due to resume on Monday, 19 October, when the prosecution is expected to set out its case against the 12 remaining defendants. Until then, legal teams will continue working through the husband's statement and the accompanying documents, a task that Judge Greene described as careful and ongoing. The outcome of that review will shape the next phase of a case that has already generated significant local and national interest.