UK grooming gang trial halted over juror WhatsApp scandal

Six men’s trial in Manchester stopped after Juror chat controversy. Juror WhatsApp discussions raise doubts, forcing trial pause.

The trial of six men accused of sexually abusing two teenage girls in Greater Manchester has been adjourned following concerns over what jurors discussed in a private WhatsApp group.

The alleged offences, dating from 2003 to 2006 in Rochdale, had been heard at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court. The trial started in October 2025 but was brought to a halt two months later when one juror disclosed that jurors had discussed a TV programme about grooming gangs in their private chat.

Judge Matthew Corbett-Jones ordered an investigation, reviewing every message exchanged. “One juror said others should not watch the programme, another responded ‘I’m going to watch it anyway,’ with a smiley, and another said they too would watch the broadcast,

All jurors were asked if they had, and all swore that they had not really seen the programme. The defence disputed this contention on the ground that some of the jurors may not have told the truth and requested that further questions be put. The judge refused on the ground that the doubt was not removed despite attempts at removal.

“With considerable regret and disappointment, I have come to the view that the number of problems now present and the uncertainty surrounding them mean that whatever course I choose, there will still be unanswered questions,” Judge Corbett-Jones said. He added that no reasonable solution could fully fix the situation because of the “layered nature of the problems.”

A retrial is scheduled for August 2026. Reporting restrictions, recently lifted following an application by the Manchester Evening News, prevented publication of the reasons why the jury was discharged.

The defendants – Tahir Rashid, 54; Mohammed Saleem, 46; Iftaq Hussain, 45; Sucklane Shah, 46 – all deny rape. Arshad Mohammed, 55, denied rape and assault by penetration while Amjad Mahmood, 53, denies a raft of charges including rape, indecent assault, indecency with a child, and assault by penetration. Rashid also faces a separate historical rape allegation from the late 1980s, to which he has pleaded not guilty. With its sensitive nature and jury complications, this case is a reminder of how hard it is to ensure a fair trial in sexual abuse cases where conduct outside the courtroom could affect high-profile proceedings.