Former Boots pharmacist struck off over rape allegations
Fitness to practise Ahmed Radwan Kaid Abdulla, registration number 2076809, has been struck off the register following allegations he raped a woman while she slept in his home, despite having been acquitted in court.
Former Boots pharmacist Ahmed Radwan Kaid Abdulla, registration number 2076809, has been struck off the professional register following allegations he raped a woman while she slept in his home.
Mr Abdulla undressed the woman and forced himself on her while she was asleep, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) found at a fitness-to-practise hearing on December 13.
The 23-year-old, who worked as a relief pharmacist at Boots in West Wales, had also taken cocaine and cannabis around the day of the rape, the committee heard.
The case was the first time the GPhC had taken forward a fitness-to-practise hearing for a serious sexual assault after a registrant had been acquitted
More fitness-to-practise cases
Mr Abdulla was acquitted of rape charges at Swansea Crown Court last April but, for the first time in a sexual assault case, the GPhC rejected his version of events and ruled to strike him off the pharmacy register.
Police first arrested Mr Abdulla on suspicion of rape in September 2011, after a woman reported being attacked at his home.
The complainant had gone out for the evening in Swansea and, after leaving her friends, had agreed to stay at Mr Abdulla's house with a man she knew called Yousif Osman, the panel heard.
After falling asleep in one of the bedrooms, she woke up to find an unknown man having sex with her and all clothes apart from her bra had been removed.
After pushing her attacker off and leaving the house, she reported the incident to the police, when she gave a description of the attacker that matched Mr Abdulla's profile.
A forensic analysis found Mr Abdulla's DNA on the complainant's underwear, which a forensic expert told the committee provided "very strong support" that he had had sex with her.
A urine sample showed he had taken both cannabis and cocaine.
When questioned by police, Mr Abdulla admitted to taking illicit drugs but continually denied the rape allegations. However, the GPhC said inconsistencies in his testimony were "damaging to his credibility".
The committee was shown CCTV footage of Mr Abdulla on the night of the attack, when he persistently approached a group of girls despite his advances being "clearly not welcome".
And, despite telling police he didn't have a Facebook account, he was later found to have a profile under the name ‘Stringer Bell' and had started a conversation with Mr Osman about the incident. He asked Mr Osman to tell the complainant she would face charges for breaking in to the house if she reported him to the police. "In any case, I'm denying I was there," he wrote.
The GPhC concluded that the complainant was a wholly credible witness and that it could rely on her evidence.
The committee did point out it received testimonials from a professor, an imam at Swansea University and a doctor, who all "spoke highly of Mr Abdulla's character".
But the panel concluded it did not find Mr Abdulla to be a credible witness and determined that he did engage in unwanted sexual conduct with the complainant. The regulator said his actions were fundamentally incompatible with continued registration and ruled to strike him off the register.
The GPhC noted that it was the first time it had taken forward a fitness-to-practise hearing for a serious sexual assault after a registrant had previously been acquitted of rape. Fitness-to-practise hearings use the civil standard of proof, which is the balance of probabilities, whereas allegations must be proved beyond reasonable doubt in the criminal standard of proof.
What do you make of the GPhC's ruling?