Jury retires to consider verdict in alleged indecent assault case

Wednesday 02 August 2017

The jury has retired to consider their verdict in the Royal Court trial of a 37-year-old man who is accused of a series of indecent assault on a young girl.

Paul Trevor Moore is pleading not guilty to all charges against him, four counts of indecent assault and six acts of procuring an act of gross indecency.

The girl is accusing Mr Moore of having exposed himself to her and touched her on several occasions. Crown Advocate Richard Pedley, who is prosecuting, described the case as  "...a sustained period of sexual abuse on a young girl." 

The alleged victim told police officers the abuse "...felt strange and distressing." 

Mr Moore, who is defended by Advocate Sarah Dale, denied ever touching the girl or asking her to touch him. He suggested he was set up  - but agreed during his cross-examination that it was "an awful lot of detail for a (young girl) to come up with." 

This morning, Royal Court Commissioner Sir Michael Birt gave his directions to the jury. Summing up, he told them that just because the victim didn't make the complaints earlier, "does not mean that it must be untrue."

"A child might not necessarily report abuse at the time, she might be confused about what happened or blaming herself or fearing she will be blamed for it and punished, or feeling she might not be believed. You must decide whether the complainant’s recollection is reliable."

He also asked the jury to take into consideration Mr Moore's condition. He reminded them he suffers from multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and some impairment with his memory "due to damage caused to his brain." "He can have difficulty retaining some information in the 20 to 30 minutes following an event, although it does not affect his long term memory. If allegations had been made at the time, he might have been able to recall details."

Sir Michael also told the jury that every victim reacts differently and the "demeanour" of a witness does not mean she is telling the truth or not. "The Court experience is that those who have been victims react in a variety of ways some exhibit real distress, others do not." 

He then concluded: "It is correct that this is a case of one person’s word against another’s, there is no supporting evidence. Naturally, jurors when deciding whether a defendant is guilty of the offences he is prosecuted for tend to look for supporting evidence. The fact that there is no supporting evidence does not mean you can't convict. It is entirely a matter for you, if you are sure she is telling the truth, convict."

The 12 members of the jury, seven women and five men, have now retired to consider their verdict.