Darlington Pub Predator Jailed for Nearly Six Years

Sudanese predator pestered women before launching terrifying toilet cubicle sex attack, court hears, as judge brands him dangerous and jails him for years. 

A man described by a judge as a dangerous offender has been jailed for nearly six years following a predatory sexual attack on a woman in a Darlington pub toilet.

Mohammed Mohammed, 24, of Newton Aycliffe, appeared at Teesside Crown Court for sentencing after previously admitting a charge of assault by penetration relating to an incident on July 27, 2024.

The court heard how the defendant, a refugee from Sudan, spent approximately 30 minutes targeting women before following his victim into a cubicle and subjecting her to a forceful sexual assault.

Read more: Nursery worker jailed for 18 years over decade-long campaign of abuse

Judge Jonathan Carroll told the defendant his conduct "drives a dagger into the sense of safety" of women and noted that the 24-year-old was "determined to find a woman" and do whatever he wanted with her.

Prosecutor Paul Newcombe told the court that Mohammed had stationed himself near the female toilets, where he harassed several women by blocking their paths and attempting to kiss them despite their clear rejection of his advances.

When the victim entered the toilets, Mohammed followed her and knocked on her cubicle door while falsely claiming to be a member of the venue's security staff conducting an identification check.

Upon the door being opened, the defendant forced the woman back against a wall, undid his belt, and groped her under her dress, ignoring her repeated pleas for him to stop until a friend of the victim interrupted the assault.

Read more: Glasgow predator jailed for raping student in city centre

Following his arrest by door staff, Mohammed claimed to police officers that he had entered the cubicle to assist the woman after hearing her screaming, a claim the prosecution characterised as a "dishonest" attempt to cover his "sustained" and "predatory" behaviour.

Although the defendant initially entered a guilty plea, the proceedings were delayed by a year after he unsuccessfully applied to vacate that plea, an action the judge noted had caused further distress to the complainant.