Taxi driver faces Brighton court charged with raping woman after Christmas party
UPDATED WITH CORRECTION AT END
A Brighton and Hove cabbie has been charged with raping a woman after dropping her home from a work Christmas party.
Ajmal Hazraty, 37, is due to appear in court this morning (Saturday 4 January) charged with two counts of raping the 31-year-old woman.
He is alleged to have raped her twice at her flat in Worthing in the early hours of Saturday 21 December.
Sussex Police said: “A man has been charged with raping a woman at an address in Worthing on (Saturday) 21 December.
“Ajmal Hazraty, 37, a taxi driver, of Haven Way, Newhaven, is due to appear in custody at Brighton Magistrates’ Court on Saturday (4 January) charged with two offences of raping the 31-year-old woman at her flat in Worthing in the early hours of Saturday 21 December.
“The charge, authorised by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service), follows an investigation by detectives from the West Sussex Safeguarding Investigations Unit.”
The attack is alleged to have happened after the victim was picked up in Western Road, close to the junction with Queen Square, at around 1.30am on the Saturday before Christmas.
Two days after the alleged attack Detective Inspector Steve Cobbett said: “This is a highly distressing incident and the victim has been seen and supported by specially trained officers from our Safeguarding Investigations Unit.”
Our original report said that Hazraty was an Uber driver. This was based on information provided in good faith by Sussex Police but which was incorrect.
Sussex Police said: “At the time of the alleged offence, Hazraty was licensed as a taxi driver by Brighton and Hove City Council.
“It has since been clarified that information previously supplied to the effect that Hazraty had been working for Uber at the time of his arrest is incorrect.
“He was a licensed taxi driver but had been working independently.”
LIKE WHAT WE DO? HELP US TO DO MORE OF IT BY DONATING HERE.
And don't forget to sign up to our email newsletter, bringing you the week's biggest stories every Thursday.
uber driver working with white and green cab. 😂😂😂. Victim said she took white and green cab from queen square taxi rank. i think repoter is still drunk till now.
Please re read the full report
The accused was not driving a Brighton hackney cab
The police press statement from December 23rd stated “It is understood the driver was in a car with green and white door panels and picked her up in Western Road, close to the junction with Queen Square.” So not a green and white B&H Hackney cab, and not from a taxi rank.
i think TJ is still drunk till now.
https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2019/12/23/woman-reports-being-raped-after-work-christmas-party-in-brighton/
Fact he was a Brighton hackney and not uber. Always Uber getting the blame. Open your eyes. All confirmed it was a Brighton hackney and not Uber.
This guy lives next door to a friend of mine in Haven Way. Nice four bedroom detached houses. He was an Uber driver
The driver WAS driving a Btn hackney. And if you check the online register of Brighton drivers you will see his name.
He is not on the register
There is definitely a Mr Hazraty on the Dual Hackney Carriage and Private Hire drivers list on the BHCC Taxi Licencing Public Register. If this is the same person or not I have no idea. Are you saying the Mr Hazraty on the list is someone else? If so prob best to make that obvious so there is no confusion.
Copied and pasted:
Search by name
Name*
Ajmal Hazraty
Search for driver
Unable to find a record with that name
Copied and pasted:
Search by name
Name*
Hazraty
Search for driver
BHCC reference 2017/04344/HCDUAL
Proprietor name (licence number) Mr Hazraty (6277)
Expiry date 25/11/2020
Vehicle description (car model)
Wheelchair access (contact no.)
Licence details (vehicle registration) Hackney Carriage Driver Dual PrivateHire
How embarrassing…
It is not embarrassing because you are only entering the surname. Enter the man’s entire name and hey presto! (you get the answer I got)
How stupid …
It seems like you have some strange axe to grind over this so i will just let you get on with it and hopefully you will move on and be incredibly rude to other strangers on the internet.
I did very clearly say in my first message that there is a Mr Hazraty on the register, and that i had no idea if it is the same person or not. You then had to jump in to prove me wrong, (why i’ve no idea, perhaps you just felt the need to put someone in their place, or perhaps you have some kind of reason to convince us that this man was an Uber driver but definitely not a hackney driver as you keep saying in your comments), by searching the register yourself to prove me wrong, but in not reading what i’d actually put in my comment got a different result in your search, then decided to try and make me look small by replying highlighting your error in searching but making it seem like i was lying, when you can search yourself as i did and get the same result, which i suspect was also the result BrightonBelle got.
Rather than just admitting your mistake in searching, acknowledging that there IS a Mr Hazraty (Although as you seem to suggest, of course Hazraty is up there with Smith and Jones for being such incredibly common names in Brighton and Hove so it could in fact be another Mr Hazraty as i in fact said in my first comment) you then went on the defensive even further with someone you have never met, pointing out yourself the mistake you had made, but desperately trying to turn it around somehow that it was me that was in the wrong that you couldn’t search correctly, confounding the original issue that you couldn’t just admit your mistake and move on.
Unlike you seemingly, i have no axe to grind either way on this issue, as i pointed out clearly in my first comment i have no idea of any information with this crime, all i did was read the comments here, see there was some question over whether this man was a hackney, uber or both diver, go to the register, find a Mr Hazraty, then have some know-it-all who seems to be way too invested in the issue, perhaps because of a personal involvement at some level, try to tell me i was wrong and there was no Hazraty on the register when there clearly was, as you would have found if you’d managed to do anything more than the basic search.
Anyway, this is a terrible crime, I hope whoever the perpetrator is they are found guilty and the victim is getting the help and support they need.
And while I am responding Jane, I lived in Haven Way until September 11 last year. My friend lives next door to the house where the Uber taxi was taken away by police last week. You think you are being clever, but you are not. I lived on that street (about 50 houses) for 10 years and knew most of the people who live there. Here is the message my friend’s sister sent me on WhatsApp, with responses following:
[13:19, 04/01/2020] (my friend’s sister): Well (redacted. Her brother) said the police were there and took the taxi away so thinking that could be it
[13:20, 04/01/2020] Papahenzpa: Yes it would be seized as evidence that the victim traveled in it to Worthing
[13:20, 04/01/2020] Papahenzpa: I read about it online
Yes and there’s only one Brighton Hackney driver called Khan.
As a taxi driver myself – I pride myself on the “HONOUR” to ensure public safety – – as one customer pointed out recently – we are the FOURTH EMERGENCY SERVICE
All this fuss about whether he was an uber or Brighton cab driver when in fact nothing has been proven either for or against. It sounds from the account that the woman concerned was quite inebriated and her colleagues had to arrange the taxi for her.
There is no excuse for this sort of thing but if the woman was so very drunk then she cannot be relied on to recount accurately the facts in this case – something the accused can rely on in his favour or something the prosecutors can rely on to prive his guilt – either way there are no winners here.
Given the record of Uber not monitoring who is actually driving their cabs, I would argue the distinction is completely necessary
“It has since been clarified that information previously supplied to the effect that Hazraty had been working for Uber at the time of his arrest is incorrect.
“He was a licensed taxi driver but had been working independently.”