The Telford kidnap dishonour abuse case shows how attempts to control a relationship can escalate into planned and collective violence. Five men have received prison sentences totalling 37 years after kidnapping a 21-year-old man whose relationship they opposed.
According to West Mercia Police, the offenders targeted the victim after discovering that he was in a relationship with an adult female relative of two members of the group. They had already made several unsuccessful attempts to attack him.
This was not an ordinary disagreement between relatives and friends. Instead, it was a calculated attack on a young man because others believed they had the right to control a relationship.
Crucially, the case exposes an important safeguarding truth: men and boys can also become victims of dishonour abuse.
What happened in the Telford kidnap?
On 29 December 2025, four masked men dragged the victim from an address in Arleston and forced him into the boot of a black Audi A4.
CCTV captured the vehicle travelling through Wellington with the boot open and the victim’s feet hanging outside.
The kidnappers then took him to a storage unit in Eyton. There, they assaulted him, tied him to a chair and held him against his will.
Meanwhile, members of the group demanded money from his family. They also threatened to kill him by throwing him from a bridge.
Eventually, the victim escaped from a car and reached a takeaway in Whitchurch. Police found him seriously injured and took him to hospital.
Four men pleaded guilty to kidnapping in January 2026. A fifth man denied the offence but a jury convicted him after a two-week trial at Shrewsbury Crown Court in June.
A sixth defendant stood trial but the jury found him not guilty.
Judges sentenced the five convicted men on 22 and 23 July 2026. Their prison sentences totalled 37 years.
Detective Chief Inspector Lee Holehouse described the attack as a horrifying ordeal carried out by men whom the victim had regarded as friends for much of his life. He called their actions cruel and calculated.
Why was this dishonour abuse?
The offenders attacked the victim after learning about his relationship.
Freedom Charity describes abuse committed in the name of family or community reputation as dishonour abuse.
There is no honour in controlling a relationship. Nor is there honour in surveillance, intimidation, abduction or violence.
Dishonour abuse occurs when relatives or wider networks threaten, control, silence or punish someone whom they accuse of bringing shame upon a family or community.
The supposed transgression may involve:
- choosing a partner;
- refusing a marriage;
- leaving an abusive relationship;
- seeking a divorce;
- expressing sexuality;
- living independently;
- pursuing education or employment;
- rejecting demands to control another person.
Responsibility rests entirely with those who choose to abuse. It never belongs to the person exercising freedom.
The Crown Prosecution Service uses the term “‘honour’-based abuse” for a category of conduct that may involve violence, threats, intimidation, coercion or other abuse connected to an alleged breach of a family or community code.
However, honour-based abuse is not a single criminal offence. Prosecutors charge the conduct involved, which may include kidnapping, assault, stalking, harassment, forced marriage, controlling or coercive behaviour, unlawful imprisonment or threats to kill.
Freedom retains official terminology where legal or search accuracy requires it. Nevertheless, our position remains clear: abuse carried out in the name of honour is dishonour abuse.
Read Freedom Charity’s full dishonour abuse definition.
Can men experience dishonour abuse?
Yes.
Women and girls remain disproportionately affected by forced marriage and many forms of violence connected to family and community control. Female genital mutilation is a specific form of abuse committed against girls and women.
However, men and boys can also face threats, coercion, abduction and violence.
A man may become a target because he enters a relationship that either family opposes. Another may face pressure to accept a marriage he does not want.
Some men experience punishment for supporting a woman who is resisting control. Others face abuse because they are gay or bisexual, reject expectations imposed upon them or refuse to monitor a female relative.
Male victims can also disappear from professional view when agencies assume that men will appear only as perpetrators, relatives or bystanders.
The Crown Prosecution Service recognises that men and boys can become victims of forced marriage and honour-based abuse. It has also acknowledged the particular barriers male victims may face when seeking help or justice.
Such assumptions are dangerous.
Safeguarding decisions must focus on conduct, threats and risk. Protection should never depend on whether someone resembles a familiar victim profile.
Why does partner choice create risk?
Most adults expect to choose their own relationships.
Within controlling families, however, relatives may treat personal choice as disobedience. Reputation and compliance can then take priority over safety, consent and individual freedom.
Pressure may begin with emotional blackmail or demands to end contact. Later, relatives or associates may monitor telephones, follow the couple, issue threats or restrict movement.
In the most dangerous cases, coercion escalates into abduction or serious violence.
Professionals must therefore consider the safety of both people in the relationship. The danger may come from either family or from a wider network acting together.
A partner can also become a deliberate target because perpetrators believe that removing or frightening that person will restore family control.
Why do perpetrator networks matter?
Dishonour abuse often involves more than one perpetrator.
One person may issue threats while another watches the victim. Relatives or associates may provide transport, share information, hold documents or arrange a meeting.
Someone who appears uninvolved may still support the abuse behind the scenes.
Moreover, collective offending changes the level of risk.
Ending contact with one person may not make the victim safe. Information can continue to pass through siblings, cousins, friends or other members of the community.
Professionals should establish:
- who objects to the relationship or decision;
- which individuals have made threats;
- who knows the victim’s home, workplace or school;
- whether anyone has followed or watched the victim;
- which vehicles, telephones and online accounts are involved;
- whether anyone has discussed or arranged overseas travel;
- who controls passports, money or important documents;
- whether relatives have proposed mediation or a family meeting.
Consequently, a risk assessment must consider the entire network rather than only the most visible individual.
Why must professionals avoid family mediation?
Professionals must never arrange family mediation where forced marriage or dishonour abuse is suspected.
Contacting relatives can expose a disclosure, alert possible perpetrators and place the victim in greater danger.
Government forced-marriage guidance warns that family group conferences may increase the risk of harm. It also advises professionals to avoid approaches that bring the victim and family together in an attempt to resolve the situation.
For that reason, professionals should see the person alone, listen privately and allow them to explain the danger in their own words.
No agency should contact relatives without considering the risks and seeking appropriate specialist advice.
What are the warning signs of dishonour abuse?
A victim may never use the words dishonour abuse.
Instead, they may say:
“My family will not allow this relationship.”
Someone else may report that relatives are watching them, tracking their telephone or approaching their partner.
Another person may fear that family members will take them abroad, force them into a marriage or punish them for embarrassing the family.
These disclosures do not merely suggest family tension.
They may indicate stalking, controlling or coercive conduct, unlawful detention, forced-marriage risk, abduction or serious violence. The precise criminal offence will depend on the facts.
Professionals should:
- speak to the person privately;
- record their words accurately;
- identify every known or suspected perpetrator;
- assess any immediate danger;
- consider risks to the person’s partner;
- agree safe methods of communication;
- avoid contacting relatives without specialist advice;
- preserve relevant evidence;
- refer promptly to the appropriate safeguarding and law-enforcement agencies.
A victim who withdraws an allegation may still face serious danger. Fear, surveillance, family pressure and threats against other people can all affect someone’s ability to continue engaging with authorities.
What must professionals change?
Police officers, teachers, health professionals, social workers and prosecutors must recognise that men and boys can become direct victims of dishonour abuse.
Agencies must also understand that several perpetrators may act together.
Therefore, professionals should never dismiss reports involving threats, surveillance, restrictions, attempted abduction or violence as cultural misunderstandings or private family disputes.
A family disagreement does not involve kidnapping, unlawful detention or threats to kill.
Culture does not excuse violence. Religion does not excuse coercion. Family reputation does not remove criminal responsibility.
Ultimately, the dishonour lies with the abuser.
Freedom Charity’s response
Aneeta Prem MBE, Founder of Freedom Charity, said:
“This case exposes a form of dishonour abuse that professionals too often miss. A young man faced planned and collective violence because others believed they had the right to control a relationship.
“Men, women and children can all become targets. What connects these cases is the use of fear, shame and punishment to deny another person freedom.
“Professionals must look beyond stereotypes and identify the full network surrounding a victim. A family disagreement does not involve kidnapping, surveillance or threats to kill.
“There is no honour in controlling who another person loves. The dishonour belongs entirely to those who abuse.”
How does Freedom Charity help?
Freedom Charity works to prevent forced marriage, female genital mutilation and dishonour abuse.
Our work combines education, early intervention and practical safeguarding support.
Freedom helps children understand consent, bodily autonomy and the right to choose their own future. Our specialist books and PSHE-accredited resources enable schools to begin difficult conversations safely.
Professionals can also access Freedom Charity’s dishonour abuse training. The training examines warning signs, collective control, victim withdrawal, unsafe mediation and effective intervention.
Freedom’s secure helpline supports people affected by forced marriage, female genital mutilation and dishonour abuse.
Friends, relatives and professionals can also seek advice when they are worried about someone else.
Early action matters because danger can escalate quickly after a family discovers a relationship, refusal or disclosure.
Getting help
Anyone in immediate danger should call 999.
Do not confront suspected perpetrators or agree to attend a family meeting.
Where it is safe, preserve messages, photographs, call records and details of threats or unwanted contact.
Tell the police about every person who may be involved, not only the most obvious offender.
Contact Freedom Charity for confidential safeguarding advice.
No person should face threats, abduction or punishment for choosing a relationship.
There is no honour in abuse.
By Aneeta Prem MBE
Freedom Charity. London
London, 26 July 2026
Sources
West Mercia Police: Group sentenced for ‘horrifying’ Telford kidnap
West Mercia Police: Man found guilty of Telford kidnapping
Crown Prosecution Service: Honour-Based Abuse
Crown Prosecution Service: Male victims of honour-based abuse and forced marriage
HM Government: Multi-agency statutory guidance for dealing with forced marriage