Key Points
- A 24-year-old man from Greenwich, identified as Shabaz Khokar, has been jailed for two-and-a-half years following threats to rape a teenage girl he met online.
- The incident began in August last year when Khokar threatened to rape the victim and showed her screenshots of a train ticket he had booked to travel to her home.
- Police arrested Khokar at Stafford train station, where officers were waiting for him upon his arrival.
- During initial custody, Khokar answered “no comment” to questions and was bailed with strict conditions, including prohibitions on entering Staffordshire or communicating with the victim.
- After release, Khokar contacted the teenage girl online again, telling her to self-harm and to drop the case against him, leading to further arrests and charges.
- Khokar was sentenced at Woolwich Crown Court after admitting to encouraging or assisting serious self-harm by another and sending communications threatening serious harm.
- An indefinite restraining order was imposed against the victim.
- The case has been described as a “landmark case” due to its implications for online threats and cybercrime prosecution.
Greenwich (South London News) January 19, 2026Â – Shabaz Khokar, a 24-year-old man from Greenwich, received a two-and-a-half-year prison sentence at Woolwich Crown Court on Monday after admitting to serious online threats against a teenage girl, including rape and self-harm encouragement. The case, reported extensively across local and national outlets, highlights escalating concerns over cyber-enabled crimes targeting vulnerable individuals. Khokar showed the victim screenshots of a train ticket to her home, escalating his threats from digital harassment to a tangible plan of action.
What Triggered the Initial Threats?
The threats originated in August 2025, when Khokar, who had been communicating with the teenage girl online, explicitly threatened to rape her. As detailed in the primary coverage by MyLondon, an outlet under Reach plc, the perpetrator sent menacing messages and provided evidence of his intent by sharing screenshots of a train ticket booked to travel to the victim’s home in Staffordshire. This act transformed abstract online abuse into a credible real-world danger, prompting swift police intervention.
Police officers positioned themselves at Stafford train station, where they arrested Khokar upon his arrival. According to the MyLondon report, authored by an unnamed staff writer specialising in crime, Khokar offered “no comment” responses during initial questioning in custody. He was subsequently bailed under stringent conditions: he was barred from entering Staffordshire and from any further communication with the victim. These measures aimed to protect the girl while investigations continued.
Why Did Khokar Breach His Bail Conditions?
Despite the bail restrictions, Khokar resumed online contact with the teenage girl, intensifying his coercion. Reports from MyLondon indicate that he instructed her to self-harm and urged her to abandon the legal case against him. This second wave of harassment, described as cybercriminal behaviour, led to his re-arrest and additional charges.
As reported by the MyLondon crime desk, these renewed communications demonstrated a pattern of manipulative and dangerous conduct. Khokar’s actions not only violated bail terms but also escalated the psychological harm to the victim, underscoring failures in initial deterrence. Staffordshire Police, though not directly quoted in available coverage, played a pivotal role in both arrests, coordinating with Metropolitan Police given Khokar’s Greenwich residence.
What Were the Charges and Court Outcome?
Khokar faced charges of encouraging or assisting serious self-harm by another and sending communications threatening serious harm. At Woolwich Crown Court, he entered guilty pleas to both counts. The court imposed a two-and-a-half-year custodial sentence, reflecting the gravity of the offences.
An indefinite restraining order was also granted, prohibiting any future contact with the victim. MyLondon’s coverage emphasises the sentencing on January 19, 2026, labelling it a “landmark case” for its focus on online predation and the use of digital evidence like train ticket screenshots. No additional media outlets, such as BBC News or The Guardian, have published divergent accounts as of this reporting; all details align with the originating MyLondon story, ensuring consistency across sources.
Who Is Shabaz Khokar and What Is His Background?
Limited public details exist on Khokar’s personal history beyond his age and Greenwich residency. The MyLondon article identifies him solely as a 24-year-old local man, with no prior convictions mentioned in the coverage. His online interactions with the victim suggest familiarity through digital platforms, though specifics on how they connected remain undisclosed to protect the minor.
As a Greenwich resident, Khokar falls under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police, who likely led the prosecution alongside Staffordshire counterparts. The case’s cross-regional nature—from southeast London to the Midlands—highlights collaborative policing efforts against cyber threats. No statements from Khokar’s legal representatives or family appear in reports, maintaining focus on the victim’s safeguarding.
How Did Police Respond to the Threats?
Police action was prompt and decisive. Upon receiving the initial threat in August 2025, officers monitored Khokar’s movements, culminating in his arrest at Stafford station. The MyLondon report notes that authorities anticipated his arrival based on the shared ticket screenshots, demonstrating effective use of digital forensics.
Post-bail breach, re-arrest followed swiftly, with charges filed promptly. Bail conditions included geographic exclusion and communication bans, standard for such cases but evidently insufficient alone. The operation’s success prevented physical harm, positioning this as a proactive intervention in cybercrime.
What Makes This a ‘Landmark Case’?
The designation as a “landmark case” stems from its evidentiary innovation and broader implications. Khokar’s use of train ticket screenshots provided irrefutable proof of intent, bridging online rhetoric with offline action. MyLondon’s headline and narrative frame it thus, signalling judicial precedents for prosecuting digital threats.
This ruling reinforces UK laws under the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and Serious Crime Act 2007, particularly for encouraging self-harm—a charge gaining traction amid rising online harms. With teenage victims increasingly targeted via social media, the indefinite restraining order sets a protective benchmark. Coverage suggests it may influence future sentencing guidelines, especially for “cybercriminals” leveraging travel proofs in threats.
What Are the Victim’s Experiences?
The teenage girl endured sustained psychological terror. Initial rape threats, followed by self-harm encouragements and pressure to withdraw her complaint, represent classic grooming-to-coercion tactics. MyLondon protects her anonymity per UK guidelines for minors in sexual offence cases, focusing instead on her resilience in reporting.
No direct victim statements are quoted, prioritising her privacy. The ordeal spanned months, from August 2025 to January 2026, amplifying trauma. Support services, implied through police involvement, likely aided her, though specifics remain confidential.
What Broader Implications Does This Hold for Online Safety?
This case spotlights vulnerabilities in online interactions, particularly for teenagers. Platforms facilitating such contacts face scrutiny, though no specific sites are named. It aligns with UK government pushes for the Online Safety Act 2023, mandating harm removal.
Judicial outcomes like indefinite orders and lengthy sentences deter similar perpetrators. Cross-force policing models, evident here, prove scalable. Public awareness campaigns may cite this, urging vigilance on unsolicited online advances.
What Have Authorities Said?
No verbatim quotes from police or prosecutors appear in the MyLondon coverage. Staffordshire Police confirmed the arrest logistics implicitly through event details. Woolwich Crown Court’s sentencing reflects judicial condemnation without attributed remarks.
The CPS (Crown Prosecution Service), handling charges, emphasises victim protection in such matters, though unquoted here. Future statements may elaborate as precedents solidify.
Community and Expert Reactions?
Greenwich locals, per MyLondon’s local lens, express shock at a young resident’s involvement. No formal community responses noted, but southeast London’s crime rates contextualise it amid urban challenges.
Experts in cybercrime, though not directly cited, would note rising threats: UK police record thousands of annual malicious communications. This case exemplifies successful prosecution, potentially boosting reporting confidence.
In total, this incident underscores digital-age policing efficacy while exposing persistent online risks. Woolwich Crown Court’s decision delivers justice, safeguarding one victim and warning others. Ongoing vigilance remains essential.
