A British woman has been jailed for six years in Hong Kong after falsely accusing a banker of rape before attempting to blackmail him for £100,000.
Isabel Rose, 26, from Hackney, east London, was convicted of blackmail and perverting the course of justice after a court concluded she had fabricated the allegation in an attempt to extort money from the man.
The case, which was heard over a six-day trial, centred on events following the pair’s meeting while travelling in Thailand before they reunited in Hong Kong in early 2024.
Rose denied the offences but was found guilty in March.
She was sentenced this week by Judge Adriana Noelle Tse Ching, who criticised her conduct throughout the proceedings and said she had shown “not an iota of remorse” for her actions.
As she was led from court, Rose reportedly blew kisses and waved to her mother before beginning her prison sentence.
The court heard that Rose first met the complainant, referred to during proceedings only as “X”, while travelling in Thailand.
The pair later arranged to meet again in Hong Kong, where they spent the evening of February 1, 2024, together.
In the days that followed, Rose reported to police that she had been raped.
The allegation resulted in the banker being arrested while officers investigated the complaint.
However, prosecutors later concluded the evidence did not support the allegation, and he was released without charge.
The investigation instead turned its focus towards Rose.
The court heard that shortly after the alleged assault, Rose requested £5,000 from the man.
He transferred the money.
Prosecutors said she later demanded a further £100,000 while threatening to report him to police if he refused to pay.
The court concluded the allegations had been fabricated as part of a blackmail attempt.
During the trial, the judge found that the pair had engaged in consensual intimate acts on the night in question.
Medical evidence presented to the court neither confirmed nor ruled out sexual intercourse, but the judge said the overall evidence overwhelmingly supported the prosecution’s case.
Judge Tse described the banker as “an honest, credible and reliable witness.”
By contrast, she found Rose to be “dishonest, uncredible and unreliable.”
Rejecting submissions made on Rose’s behalf, the judge ruled it was “crystal clear” that she had demanded money from the complainant.
Rose’s defence lawyer urged the court to impose a more lenient sentence, pointing to her previous good character, lack of criminal convictions and the difficulties she had faced while remaining in Hong Kong awaiting trial.
The court heard Rose had been unable to leave the territory or work there during the two years between her arrest and sentencing because of the criminal proceedings.
Judge Tse rejected those submissions, finding the seriousness of the offending outweighed the mitigating factors advanced by the defence.
For the blackmail offence, the court imposed a starting sentence of five years’ imprisonment.
A further sentence of three years was imposed for perverting the course of justice.
The judge ordered one year of that second sentence to run consecutively, resulting in a total prison term of six years.
Following sentencing, Rose was transferred to Tai Lam Correctional Institution, Hong Kong’s oldest maximum-security prison for women.
False allegations of serious criminal offences can have profound consequences for those accused.
In this case, the banker was arrested and became the subject of a police investigation before the allegation was found to be false.
The court accepted the prosecution’s case that the report had been deliberately fabricated in order to obtain money from him.
The conviction for perverting the course of justice reflects the court’s finding that Rose intentionally misused the criminal justice system by making a false allegation.
Blackmail, meanwhile, relates to the court’s conclusion that she sought financial gain by threatening to pursue the false complaint unless she received payment.
Throughout the proceedings, the complainant denied raping Rose and maintained that their encounter had been entirely consensual.
The judge ultimately accepted that account after hearing evidence over six days of trial.
Rose’s convictions mean the criminal proceedings against her have concluded unless an appeal is lodged.
The case has attracted significant attention because of the seriousness of the original allegation and the court’s finding that it had been fabricated.
Judge Tse’s sentencing remarks made clear that the court regarded the offences as a grave abuse of both the criminal justice system and the trust placed in complainants who report genuine sexual offences.
The banker, who cannot be identified for legal reasons and was referred to only as “X” throughout the proceedings, was fully acquitted of any wrongdoing after prosecutors determined there was no basis to pursue the rape allegation.
Rose will now serve her six-year prison sentence in Hong Kong following her convictions for blackmail and perverting the course of justice.
