Manhattan Man Faces 116-Count Torture Indictment

Man in suit speaking at podium with American flags behind — Photo: lev radin / Shutterstock

Manhattan prosecutors say a 116-count indictment details hours-long torture of multiple women using a shock collar, a cattle prod, and water submersion inside a Midtown apartment.

Story Snapshot

Ryan Hemphill is charged with 116 crimes tied to assaults on six women in 2024–2025, prosecutors say.
Allegations include use of a shock collar, a cattle prod, waterboarding, and repeated submersion.
Prosecutors call it a “calculated campaign of violence” lasting several months across multiple victims.
Hemphill has pleaded not guilty and remains jailed pending trial, according to reports.

Prosecutors Outline Graphic Torture Allegations

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg announced charges that describe multi-hour assaults on six women inside a Midtown apartment between October 2024 and March 2025. The indictment alleges the women were raped, restrained, and tortured with electric shocks. Prosecutors say a cattle prod and a shock collar were used as weapons. They also say the women were threatened with further harm if they resisted. The case centers on a detailed charging document and statements made in open court.

Prosecutors say the abuse often lasted for hours and involved forced submission and pain. The victims were allegedly shocked, waterboarded, and held under water, then pulled up and submerged again. One account describes a shock collar fastened around a woman’s neck during a seven-hour ordeal. The charging papers also describe physical beatings and restraints. These details appear across several outlets, but trace back to the same court filings and the district attorney’s public release.

The Scope and Charges in the 116-Count Indictment

The indictment lists predatory sexual assault, rape, strangulation, and other violent charges. Prosecutors say the six victims were targeted over five months, with similar patterns each time. They describe a method that mixed physical pain, fear, and tight control. The district attorney’s office says the assaults were recorded in some cases. That assertion supports why the office labels the case a “calculated campaign of violence” with repeated acts over time.

News reports say Hemphill pleaded not guilty and remains in custody after his arrest. Court records and the district attorney’s statement anchor that point. The not guilty plea preserves his right to contest the charges at trial. Until a verdict is reached, the allegations are not proven in court. Prosecutors, however, have placed extensive detail into the public record through the charging document and their statements in court and to the press.

Why This Case Grabs Public Attention

This case draws intense focus because the claims are graphic, repeated, and paired with specific tools of control. Reported use of a cattle prod, a shock collar, and waterboarding stands out as especially cruel. The length of the alleged assaults raises questions about how predators use privacy, power, and fear to trap victims. Many readers see a system struggle to protect people until after long harm is done, which feeds wider anger at institutions seen as slow or captured by elites.

Prosecutors say a wealthy image helped lure and silence victims. That fits a pattern where status can hide abuse until many incidents pile up. People across the political spectrum often agree on this point: power can shield the worst behavior. That belief fuels public pressure for faster action, better victim support, and tougher penalties for serial violence. The case’s scale and the 116 counts make it a test of how the justice system handles complex, repeated harm.

What Comes Next in Court

Next steps include motions, evidence review, and hearings before any trial. Prosecutors must prove each charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Defense lawyers will challenge the facts, the evidence, and the law. A jury would weigh credibility and any records the state presents. The large number of counts means the process may be long. A single case like this can also prompt lawmakers to revisit rules on pretrial detention and penalties for serial predatory acts.

For the public, the lesson is clear. Early information often comes from prosecutors and court papers. Later, more details can surface through hearings and trial. For now, the allegations are specific and severe, and they are consistent across official statements and multiple reports. The case shows why trust in institutions rises or falls on whether they stop repeat abuse fast and deliver justice that fits the harm, no matter the suspect’s money or status.