England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges)

IN THE FAMILY COURT
SITTING AT BOURNEMOUTH

		10 June 2015

HIS HONOUR JUDGE BOND:

1. These proceedings concern B who is nearly seven months old. Her parents are A (the mother) and J (the father).
2. I apologise for the length of time that it has taken to produce this judgment. The first draft was sent to the typists on about 20^th May. It was returned to me on 9^th June.
3. The local authority (the Bournemouth Borough Council) issued care proceedings of 7^th November 2014. This was because the local authority was aware that the father had been convicted after a trial in December 2001 of the indecent assault of a two-year-old girl. The offence had occurred in 2000. The father was in prison for four years and placed indefinitely on the Sex Offenders Register. Before the parents decided to start a family they approached the local authority. The parents were visited by the police and a specialist social worker who dealt with sexual offenders.
4. The mother has not previously been involved with the police or Children's Services. The parents wish to live together with B who is at present living with her maternal grandparents.
5. The father has consistently maintained that he was unjustly convicted.
6. The father has been involved in other Care Proceedings in 1998 and 2001 (before his conviction) relating to two of his children who have since been adopted.
7. In the course of the preparation of these proceedings material was disclosed in relation to earlier allegations which had been made against the father in the 1990's. It is those matters which have become the subject of this hearing. Although the police investigated these allegations and took a number of statements, there was no prosecution in respect of them. In 1998 the father was convicted of Harassment of the family of one of those complainants. He served a term of imprisonment and was made the subject of ten year Restraining Order in relation to that family.
8. Given the father's convictions it was not originally thought to be necessary for the court to investigate the events of the 1990's. The views of the local authority and the guardian have since altered. They were of the view that in order properly to plan for B, findings on these matters are necessary.
9. A hearing took place before Ms Recorder Searle on 10^th March 2015 [B96] at which it was decided that there should be a Fact Finding hearing in relation to the historic allegations.
10. The Local Authority's schedule of proposed findings is annexed to this judgment. There are three groups of allegations. The first relates to a child Zoe about matters which are said to have happened between 1994/7. Zoe was then aged between 9 and 11. She is the daughter of the father's then partner Louise. The second group of allegations relations to a child Jessica as to events between August 1996 and May 1997. Jessica, who was then aged 9 or 10, is the daughter of the couple with whom the father was then lodging. The third group relates to allegations that between May and November 1999 the father exposed himself on various occasions to school girls who were on their way to and from school.
11. Law: the local authority has the burden of proving to the court that the alleged matters happened. This requires the court to assess and analyse all the evidence in the case. The standard of proof is to the civil standard which means that the allegations have to be proved upon the balance of probabilities. The court must decide in respect of each of the allegations whether the father behaved as is alleged. The events either happened or they did not. There is no room for a finding that something might have happened.
12. The management of this case has not been straightforward. Most of the witnesses gave evidence from a remote video-link. This was arranged so that the father was not able to see the witnesses on the screen in the courtroom, although he was present.
13. I am grateful to all the professionals concerned in the preparation and hearing of this case. It has been an excellent example of efficient and collaborative case management.
14. Evidence: As to the Zoe allegations, Zoe herself did not give evidence at this hearing although there is other material in the trial bundle which relates to Zoe's complaints against the father. Jessica gave evidence via video-link, as did her mother Susan. A further potential witness, Sheridan, who was the father's partner during the period of Jessica's allegations, provided a statement. There was uncertainty as to whether or not she would give live evidence via a video-link at this hearing. Having vacillated in relation to her decision, Sheridan ultimately declined to give oral evidence.
15. A number of the former school girls made statements to the police about the allegations that the father had indecently exposed himself to them. Four of those witnesses gave evidence via the video-link. The father himself gave his evidence from the witness box.
16. Evidence:

The first witness was Jessica who gave her evidence via a remote video-link. Her first police witness statement is dated 8^th October 2004 and appears at H31. She made a further witness statement on 14^th June 2006 which appears at H87. At H69 is the transcript of Jessica's ABE interview which was conducted on 14^th May 1997. At C70 is Jessica's statement prepared for the purposes of these proceedings. It is dated 13^th April 2015.

17. In her statement at H31 Jessica describes how the father and his then partner Sheridan moved into Jessica's house as lodgers. The statement goes on to say:

"About a week after I had returned from camp I remember I had gone to bed early as I was going off to Chessington with Winton Liberal Club. This is the first time that (the father) came into my room. I was asleep and so, I believe, was my sister. Our room had a cabin bed up against the wall, which I slept on. … I do not know what time it was when (the father) came into our room as I was in a deep sleep. It was dark outside but the light being on the landing lighted up our room. My bed knocking and moving about woke me up and as I opened my eyes I saw (the father) standing next to my bed looking over at me. He asked me if I wanted to learn how to kiss; I was half-asleep and wondered what was going on. I did not reply. I was trying to work out what was going on and he said to just kiss him but I said, "No." … . He kissed me and I did not want to wake my sister up so I did not make a big fuss. He kissed me by putting his lips on mine, what I would now describe as snogging me. … He then started to play around with my private parts. He was standing by the cabin bed where it goes down slightly so the bed was at his shoulder level. I was lying in the bed with the quilt on and wearing my Dalmatian nightie. His hands came under the quilt and he started to squeeze my vaginal area with his fingers. He had his hands under my knickers directly onto my vagina. He did not say anything…"

18. In this statement Jessica goes on to explain how the father repeated this behaviour night after night for a couple of months from August when she was aged nine. The process then changed in that from about October onwards the father told Jessica to go into his bedroom. During the period from mid-October to mid-December she describes how the abuse worsened until "he eventually raped me." She refers to the father telling her that if she told anyone Jessica would be in serious trouble. Reference was also made to a knife which was lying on the floor in the father's bedroom (H33). He handled the knife in a threatening manner which was intended to frighten her.
19. Jessica maintains that she was raped by the father about three or four times a week until he moved out of Jessica's house in February or March of 1997. Following this Jessica and her sister visited the father and Sheridan at his house where he again raped her on about six occasions.
20. Jessica says in her statement that she was too frightened to say what the father had been done when she underwent the ABE interview on 14^th May 1997 (H69).
21. At H34 Jessica explains that she had come forward with this information in October 2004 as she had just heard that the father was shortly due to be released from prison.
22. In her statement at H87 dated 14^th June 2006 Jessica said as follows:
23. "I stand by my complaint of rape and sexual abuse by (the father) as described in my statement but I am aware there are no witnesses or supporting evidence and my life has now moved on and I have accepted what happened to me and I do not want to relive this in court but would (illegible) support any other victim or (illegible) (illegible) required."
24. At C70 is Jessica's statement dated 13^th April 2015. In that statement Jessica asserted that her statement made in 2004 is accurate save for her description of her recollection of when the father had first raped her. In paragraph six of her statement at C70 Jessica says she cannot now recall whether (the father) picked up the knife or whether he held the knife close to her. At the time of that statement (2004) Jessica was in an abusive relationship with her then boyfriend who threatened her with knives and she may have become confused. She is certain, however, that she did see a knife in (the father's) room.
25. In her oral evidence Jessica described the layout of the bedrooms. A sketch was prepared showing the arrangement of the rooms and who slept in which. She described how on the first occasion that (the father) came into her room his partner Sheridan later entered and said to him: "I thought you had stopped that kind of thing."
26. She was adamant that her description at H33 following the first incident of rape she bled on the bed and how painful the process had been. She remembered (the father) saying that if she told anyone what had happened he would kill her.
27. When cross-examined it was pointed out to her that the house was not large and the rooms were close together. The room occupied by Jessica was next to that occupied by her mother and her partner Dave. There was a further lodger known as "Little Dave" who slept downstairs in the conservatory. It is right that Jessica alleged that her step-father Dave had sexually assaulted her but he was acquitted of these charges at trial. This episode was after the allegations of 1996/7.
28. Jessica accepted that she did not get on well with her step father, Dave but did not agree that the father was acting as a beneficent father-figure to her. She asserted that he groomed her.
29. She was asked a number of questions about how it was that she awoke to find (the father) standing next to her. It seems that the cabin bed had a ladder and there was a suggestion that he may have been climbing up the ladder and therefore moved the bed and awoke Jessica. In relation to the knife Jessica said that her boyfriend in 2004 wanted the father to be prosecuted for what he had done to her and told her to say that the father had threatened her with the knife. She said that she was more scared of her then boyfriend and lied about the knife as a consequence but everything else in her statement is true.
30. She asserted that between Christmas 1996 and March 1997 the father had raped her on three occasions each week but she did not tell anybody. This happened at night or in the early morning. The father then worked at a DJ and came home in the small hours of the morning.
31. She was asked about the matters described at H35 where it is said that Sheridan was also involved on one occasion. It was put to her that Sheridan denies being thus involved to which Jessica asserted that Sherrie is lying. She pointed out with reference to her statement at C70 paragraph 10 that the father made her believe that they were in what were described as a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship and that he became jealous if another boy looked at her. He made her feel very special and she recalls that he had a sports car.
32. Finally in relation to her memory of what occurred when she was aged ten Jessica said that she recalls major events but not details.
33. The next witness was Susan who was Jessica's mother. Her statement is at C67 and is dated 1^st April 2015. In her statement Susan describes how it was that the father was living at a bail hostel in Weymouth where he met Sheridan and they became boy and girlfriend. Susan and her husband Dave were persuaded by the father that the allegations which she believed to be of a sexual nature and the subject of criminal proceedings were false and since the father needed an address to live in in Bournemouth Susan agreed to allow him to live at her address and register it as his address for bail purposes.
34. The bedrooms were arranged so that the father had the small bedroom on his own and Sherrie shared a room with Jessica and her sister. The father left the house in March or April 1997 and returned to his own property. Thereafter Jessica and her sister visited his address although Susan thought that Sheridan was always present during those visits which never lasted overnight.
35. Although Jessica has never told her mother what she says happened to her, it was one day in May 1997 at about 0800 that she received a telephone call either from Sheridan or Sheridan's mother in which the nature of the allegations was explained to her. The father was charged following the allegations but the charges were dropped partly because Sheridan kept changing her story. Sheridan said the allegations were true if she and the father had fallen out but said they were untrue if she and the father were on good terms. It was in 1999 that Jessica made allegations against Susan's then husband David.
36. In her oral evidence Susan described how the father and Jessica appeared to be quite close but that he did not get on with Jessica's sister. Susan objected to the idea when he suggested that he should be a father-figure for Jessica.
37. Susan thought that Jessica and her sister visited the father and Sheridan after they had moved out on about four or five occasions. Susan said that she had no reason to be concerned about this.
38. Susan described how she had what were described as House Rules whereby Lodgers were not allowed into the girls' bedroom or main bedroom. She agreed that her husband David had been acquitted at trial in relation to Jessica's allegations against him but she (Susan) was aware of other allegations and did not think that Jessica had lied about what she said David had done.
39. Susan never saw or heard anything which could be described as of a sexual nature between the father and Jessica. Susan generally went to bed earlier than other members of the household and never heard anything untoward at night or in the morning. For a time Susan schooled Jessica at home. She noticed no change in Jessica's appearance or anything significant. She said that she was sad about Jessica's poor relationship with Dave. Susan was aware that in 2004 Jessica was in an abusive relationship. In May 1997 she described the father and Sheridan as frequently arguing and falling in and out. There was a lot of shouting and what she described as mild physical violence.
40. Susan did not think it possible that the father could visit Jessica nightly in her room and assault her in the way Jessica described without Jessica's sister being aware of what was happening. Susan thought it would have been possible for the father to take Jessica into his room without anybody hearing. Sheridan would have been aware of what was going on.
41. When Jessica and her sister were occupying bunk-beds Jessica's sister was generally in the top bunk but there was a time when Sheridan slept in the bottom bunk and Jessica in the single bed which had been occupied by Sheridan.
42. Susan described how she used to work part-time from 9-5 on three days a week and generally took Jessica to school. She educated Jessica at home for about nine months up until May 1997 which was during most of the time that the father and Sheridan were living at Susan's home. Her husband Dave was working five days a week from 8 until 5.
43. She agreed that the father had worked as a DJ in the evenings when living with Susan and had his own key to the house. She was never woken up by JB when he returned late at night.
44. I now turn to consider the allegations made by Zoe. Zoe did not give oral evidence at this hearing. There is a quantity of documentary material relating to Zoe. In section H is Sheridan's statement to the police dated 13^th May 1997 (H18). In this statement Sheridan explains that she was living at a bail hostel in Weymouth in March 1996. She met JB and learnt that he was on bail for allegations of abuse in respect of Zoe. They began a relationship in July 1996. The charges in respect of Zoe were dropped. At H20 Sheridan says:

"In July 1996 (the father) began to tell me about how he had sexually abused Zoe."

45. At H21 Sheridan's statement continues:

"He told me that Zoe had come on to him. He described the first occasion when Zoe was in bed with the father and Zoe's mother Louise who was asleep at the time. Apparently Zoe began to rub the father's penis and sexual intercourse took place.

46. He told me how Zoe would stay awake until when he came home late from the Night Club where he worked as a DJ. She would get into bed with him and sometimes they would have sex together. (The father) said he had been having a sexual relationship with Zoe from an age of 9 years through to 12 years old."
47. At H23 Sheridan says that:

"(The father) admitted to having a sexual relationship with Jessica for the last year."

48. At H384 is a statement made by Zoe on 14^th November 1997. Zoe was then aged 13.
49. At H384 Zoe says that about a year after the father had moved in he started to pay particular attention to her. She says that he was sexually assaulting her but it was never proved. She describes an incident in the summer of 1996 when she met him by chance when shopping and sought the help of a security guard. At H388 she describes an incident when two funeral wreaths were left outside the front door following the incident in August 1997 when it is said that the father, together with another man, acted in a threatening manner.
50. Starting at H389 and running through to H403 are three statements by Louise who is Zoe's mother and was for a time the father's partner. The statements are dated August, September and October 1997. She describes the father's abusive and threatening behaviour towards her. She also describes how he took Zoe out by herself and when she complained he said to Louise that she must be jealous because Zoe thought more of him than her mother.
51. At H390 Louise describes how it was that in September 1994 she became extremely concerned and formed the opinion that the father was sexually assaulting Zoe. She says:

"… primarily because I caught them both in the bathroom together whilst he was having a bath. They both jumped and acted as if they were hiding something and although Zoe claimed that anything (sic) had gone on I decided to report the matter to the police."

Louise then moved out of the home. The girls went temporarily into foster care. She describes further threats made to her by the father. At H392 Louise says as follows:

"In about February 1996 Zoe opened up to my mother (Linda) that she had been sexually abused by (the father) for the past two and a half years since she was nine and a half years of age. As a result he was arrested and interviewed not only in relation to allegations concerning Zoe but also to other girls who were friends of Zoe's from Glenmoor School."

52. There was no prosecution and Louise goes on to describe the incident in the Dolphin Centre at Poole described by Zoe in her statement and the harassing and threatening behaviour of the father.
53. At H401 in her statement of 27^th August 1997 she describes the incident which took place in the High Street and in Halfords where they had taken refuge. There are also statements by Halford's employees which deal with this incident (H409-414).
54. At H419 is the interview which took place on 27^th September 1997 when the father was asked about these matters. Generally speaking he made no comment in the interview.
55. In section J is a quantity of further documents which relate to Zoe's allegations. At J62 is a medical report followed by a letter from Dr Atkinson who was a GP and Deputy Police Sergeant. The doctor examined Zoe on 12^th February 1996 following the initial allegation made on 12^th February 1996 that the father had been rubbing himself against Zoe. Later that day Zoe had written a note to her maternal grandmother. In that note Zoe said that the father had had full sexual intercourse with Zoe on the previous Saturday night (10^th February 1996) and had been doing so on a regular basis since she was nine years old.
56. At J64 the doctor reported as follows:

"Following the examination, I felt that the medical findings were inconclusive and neither supported nor refuted Zoe's allegations. The hymen and orifice was not enlarged for a girl of her age and development, and there was no evidence of any scars or damage."

57. Zoe was further examined in the presence of Dr Atkinson by Dr Hayward on 28^th (?) February 1996. A report states:-

"There was a very obvious periural wart just above and to the right of the urethra. The findings were otherwise as on 12^th February 1996; there was no sign of any trauma/injury … the vulva and vagina looked entirely normal; there was a white mucoid discharge present. Swabs and blood samples were taken to exclude any sexually transmitted disease, and these all proved to be negative as was a pregnancy test".

58. The report concludes as follows:

"In conclusion, although Zoe's hymen or orifice was not enlarged for a girl of her age and development, some degree of penetration could have occurred, but my impression was that it was unlikely to have occurred to the extent as described by Zoe. As Zoe does not have any warts on her hands, I conclude that it is likely that the wart seen in the periurethral area was transferred by contact with either a penis with warts on, or from someone's hands with warts."

59. At J67 is a letter from Dr Atkinson dated 25^th February 1998. This followed a request from the local authority to use the earlier medical report in care proceedings in which Zoe was then involved. The letter contains the following paragraph:

"I would just like to reiterate the fact that there were no abnormal medical findings on examination, apart from the small wart just above and to the right of the urethra. The examination was therefore inconclusive, and neither supported nor refuted Zoe's allegation. The wart could have been transferred by contact with the penis with warts on, but equally could have been transferred from someone's hard with warts sometime earlier, as the incubation period for warts can be anything from one month to several months or longer." The presence of the wart is consistent with the allegation that the father had been rubbing himself against Zoe.

.

60. Zoe herself was interviewed on four occasions and a transcript of those interviews appears in section J120-162, J212-275, J276-303 and J304-321. In her interviews Zoe makes a number of allegations which include inappropriate touching and full penetration (J123, J127, J131).
61. There are also interviews with a child Emma [J163-180] and Amber [J181-211]. At J173 Emma describes what she says the father was doing with Zoe. Similarly at J189 Amber describes an incident in the changing room at a swimming pool.
62. Exposure allegations.

The documentary evidence in respect of this contains statements from six people who were school girls at the relevant time. Three of them gave oral evidence at this hearing. There are also police interviews of the father which took place in November and December 1999.

63. The first of these witnesses to give oral evidence was Victoria. Her two statements dated 21^st June 1999 and 26^th December 1999 appear at H93 and H273. She confirmed the truth of those statements. She was aged 15 in June 1999. In her statement she says:

"On Tuesday 15^th June 1999 I stayed behind at school to use the computers and I left at about 4.30pm. I cycled from the school across to Slades Farm Park and then I cycled up the new cycle path towards the Talbot Woods."

Later in the statement she says:

"I noticed a man walking up the path, from the Slades Farm direction, pushing a bike. I would describe him as white, medium height, of stocky build. He seemed quite big-boned. He was wearing baggy white shorts, a sort of Adidas style, and nothing on his top. I did not notice his footwear. I would describe his hair as short, blond, with a short fringe that appeared to be gelled into little peaks. I think he was aged between 25 to 35 years old."

Later in her statement she says:

"When I returned to my bike I noticed he was not wearing his cap, he was not pushing his bike anymore and he was taking his shorts off. I felt threatened and went and hid behind a bush, thinking he would go. I could see the outline of his naked body through the trees and I waited about a minute. I then saw something white being pulled up as if he was pulling up his shorts. I thought he was going to the toilet. When I came back onto the path, he was stood there, still, looking at me. I was really scared and got on my bike really quickly. He said to me, "There's no need to worry," in a strange way, as if expecting me to just stand there and watch him. He began to take off his shorts again. I then got on my bike and cycled as fast as I could up towards St. Mark's. When he spoke there was no noticeable accent so I think he was local."

64. In her oral evidence Victoria confirmed that she remembered what occurred in the woods although was vague about what happened later on. She confirmed that when he removed his shorts everything was exposed.
65. Her second statement at H273 deals with the events of 9^th December 1999 when she told the court that she identified the man as the one that she had seen in the woods in June. She confirmed that she had not been told his name but was certain it was the same man as she had seen him hanging around and he was often cycling in the area.
66. Victoria confirmed that there had been general discussion in the school that had a man had been "flashing" in the wood. These discussions had been going on since about 1996. She was not aware of the father's name until two weeks ago. She heard nothing further about the case following the I.D. Parade until contacted in relation to these proceedings.
67. She confirmed that the light was good and that the point at which she saw the man was a well-travelled route. She confirmed that what occurred was frightening.
68. The next witness was Natasha whose main statement is at H90 and is dated 7^th June 1999. At H272 is a statement relating to the I.D. Parade. She confirmed the truth of both statements.
69. In her first statement she refers to Tuesday 18^th May 1999 when she left school at about 3.20pm and walked towards the University roundabout. As she reached a gate she looked to her right into the woods and saw a male who appeared to have come from behind the bush. He was standing about a metre into the woods. The statement goes on to say:

"This male was totally naked and was staring ahead and looked almost spaced out. He did not look directly at me. I could see that he was holding his willy. He did not speak to me and I walked quickly by. I was quite scared at what I had seen and went all hot. My main reaction was to cross the road as soon as possible and walk up to where my mum was waiting for me."

70. She went on to describe the male as about 5'8" tall, medium to stocky build with short, thick, browny-blond hair. She described his hair as being swept back and was aged approximately 25 years. He had no facial hair and she could see him quite clearly as there were no bushes in the line of sight. On 9^th December 1999 she attended at the identification suite, identified the male standing behind a screen as the person she had seen on Wednesday 18^th May 1999 standing naked in Talbot Woods.
71. In her oral evidence she confirmed that the man was completely naked and holding his penis. She had not seen the man before the incident and did not know of his name. She described herself as having been a naïve child and seeing a naked man upset her and made her wary of people. At this point Natasha became upset and said that she did not get over this experience until she was aged approximately 18 or 19.
72. The next witness was Jocelyn. Her only statement is at H264 and is dated 27^th November 1999. She describes the events of a day in June 1999 and Tuesday 7^th September 1999. She confirmed the truth of her statement. In June 1999 she was walking in Talbot Woods with two friends at about 3.30pm. They were walking from school when they saw a male standing in the bushes about two metres from the path. He was wearing a short T-shirt. His jeans, which were a stonewash blue colour, were down around his ankles. She described the male as holding his penis and masturbating. He appeared "spaced out." She describes how she had a good look at his face for a couple of seconds and her view was unobstructed. She described him as about 23 to 25 years old, between 5'7" to 5'11" tall, of average build, quite muscular, clean-shaven and his hair was blond, cut in a short curtains style."
73. At her statement at H265 Jocelyn goes on to describe how at 11.30am on Tuesday 7^th September she was talking to school with two friends. It was the first day of term. As they were leaving the Woods to enter Slades Farm her statement says:

"I saw the same man again. He was completely naked except for white trainers he was wearing. He was stood between the bush and a tree on the left-hand side of us. Again he was holding his penis and masturbating. He was also looking into the distance again."

In her statement she confirmed that this was the same man as she recognised his face.

74. In her oral evidence she explained that she could clearly see what he was doing and it appeared that he wanted to be seen. (June 1999)
75. She described the events of 7^th September 1999 as being similar to what had happened in June although not in exactly the same place She could see the male's fully erect penis as on the previous occasion and had a clear view of his face on both occasions. She said it was definitely the same guy.
76. She recalled the mention of an I.D. Parade but was not asked to attend.
77. The next witness was Karen whose statement is at H96 and is dated 15^th November 1999. She was 13 at the time of her statement and describes the events of 2^nd November 1999.
78. On that occasion she left her house at about 08.35 to walk to school and describes that as she approached the subway near Talbot Village she saw a man who she knew as Jez who lived in McWilliam Close. He was riding a mountain bicycle. She knew Jez as a man who lived in the area and was known for "flashing" in the woods. She could not recall how she had learned that this is what he had been doing. Later in her statement at H97 she describes how when the male was about 20 yards away he got off his bicycle and looking directly at Karen and her friends took off his T-shirt and stepped out of his white shorts so that he was completely naked. She does not recall that his penis was erect but he was not trying to cover himself up in any way. In her oral evidence she confirmed that he had no underwear and that in her words "he was definitely flashing at us."
79. It was put to her in cross-examination that she had some form of crush on Jez and together with one or two friends used to sit on a wall and removed her blouse in order to attract Jez's attention. It was also put to her that she used to sit outside his house waiting for him to appear. She denied both suggestions. I accept her evidence about that.
80. Leanne, who is Karen's sister, also made a statement about the events of 2^nd November 1999 and this is at page H99. Leanne did not give oral evidence. Lucy also made a statement dated 2^nd November 1999 when she was aged 14. That statement appears at H101. She did not give oral evidence. In her statement she describes how she used to keep a horse at Whites Farm near Talbot Woods. She described how over the previous 18 months or so she did often see a man with a bicycle watching her and other girls who came horse-riding. She described him as white, late 20s, large muscular build which she thought was similar to that of a bodybuilder and had blond hair in a curtain style. He often had a blue-coloured mountain bike with him. She had been told by friends that his name was Jez and he had a wife called Sheridan.
81. She describes the events of Tuesday 26^th October 1999 when she saw Jez standing about ten metres away from her in the woods behind a small wire fence. He was completely naked. She saw that he was playing with his penis which she did not think was erect. He looked directly at Lucy but said nothing.
82. She also described the events which took place at about 08.30 on Tuesday 2^nd November when she was walking on her own past Talbot Woods. She again became aware of a naked man whom she immediately recognised to be Jez. He was naked and holding and playing with his penis but she was not sure if it was erect.
83. I thought that the four witnesses who gave evidence about these episodes were impressive. I accept what they told me. They had a reasonable time to see the man and what he was doing.
84. The next witness was the father. His statement is dated 23^rd April 2015 and is at C63. Louise, the mother of Zoe and Hayley, moved in with him in about 1994 following which he went to work in Spain for approximately eight months. Following Louise's allegations that he had sexually molested Zoe the children were removed and Louise separated from the father. The children were returned to Louise who subsequently reconciled with him and they continued to live together. He was later arrested in relation to an accusation of sexual abuse of Zoe but those charges were discontinued in April 1996.
85. At paragraph 14 of his statement at C66 the father relates that in 2001 he was convicted for an indecent assault in relation to an incident which he says allegedly occurred on 16/17^th December 2001. The conviction followed a trial but he continues to assert that he was wrongfully convicted.
86. In relation to the Schedule of proposed Findings (4) which relates to the indecent assault, the father admitted in his oral evidence that he lied during the course of his interview in relation to that offence. As Mr. Cholerton pointed out in his submissions, the fact that the father lied does not mean that he lied about everything in the case or that that his evidence is inherently unreliable.
87. In his statement at C64, paragraph 4, the father denies that he ever had sexual relations with Zoe or in any way abused her. He describes her as quite a difficult child.
88. In paragraph 8 following his arrest in relation to the allegations made by Zoe, he denied that he ever told Sheridan that he had had sexual intercourse with Zoe because such a thing had never occurred. The father pointed out that Sheridan made a number of allegations which she then withdrew. At paragraph 9 the father says that he never admitted to Sheridan that he had a relationship with Jessica. There was no such relationship.
89. In relation to the exposure allegations the father asserted in paragraph 11 at C65 that a number of young girls, including Lucy and Karen, found him attractive and either gathered outside his house or if they saw him in the road, took off their school blouses and flaunted themselves at him.
90. The father was extensively cross-examined by Mr Langrish on behalf of the local authority. He was referred to a psychiatric report prepared by Dr Gallwey dated 15^th September 1997. This report was prepared in the context of care proceedings in relation to his daughter Jade, then five months old. Jade's mother is Sheridan. The report was prepared with a view to expressing an opinion as to the risk that the father may present to children.
91. In his oral evidence the father told the court that he had a satisfactory sex life with both Louise and Sheridan.
92. In that context he was referred to the Report at J84 where the father described that he had difficulty in getting erections and that following separation from Louise he went numb and never recovered his sexual drive. In his oral evidence he described himself as quite shy in his sexual relationships and denied that he was what might be described as an Exhibitionist. It was put to him that at J75, which is a report prepared by the community forensic team in April 1997, he had denied any sexual dysfunctioning. The father was unable to comment about that apparent discrepancy.
93. Further, he was unable to explain why it was that at J83 in Dr Gallwey's report the father admitted to an interest in soft pornography but had denied the use of pornography in the earlier report at J75.
94. At H215 is part of the police interview with the father which occurred on 5^th November 1999. He there described a normal and active sexual relationship with Sheridan. At page H216 there is reference to a folder containing a number of pictures of the father in which he was lying naked on a bed playing with himself. At H217 the officer asked the question:-

"Would you describe yourself as an exhibitionist?"

"A:- Definitely not."

"Q:- Well there are photographs of you on the bed playing with yourself …"

95. In his oral evidence the father asserted that he was advertising pictures of himself in a sex magazine. He was single at the time and "needed to show yourself in such a magazine." He said that whereas he was shy with people that he knew this was not the case in a magazine. This seemed to me to be an extraordinary reply and it did not help the father's case.
96. In so far as the allegations in relation to Zoe are concerned the father denied that he was grooming her although he did pay her more attention as he felt she was ignored within the home. He also said that she had a fear of men and at first was shy but at J75 he describes Zoe as often flirting and that Zoe had lied in relation to the allegations against him.
97. The father explained that in 1994 he had a holiday for some three months in Spain with Louise. Following Louise's allegations they continued to live together for about three years but he could not remember how it was that that came about.
98. At H390 is Louise's witness statement dated 2^nd October 1997 in which she described the father's intimidating and, on one occasion, violent behaviour. She described how it was that in September 1994 Louise became extremely concerned that he was sexually assaulting Zoe. The father was asked by Mr Langrish why it was if false allegations had been made against him about his behaviour towards Zoe he agreed to reconcile with Louse. His answer was that he thought the allegation was a "one off at the time". He was young and stupid and had decided to reconcile with Louise.
99. At J8 is a chronological background in relation to information gathered from the file held by the local authority. At paragraph 62 on J9 Hayley, who was interviewed by the police in September 1994, was reported by her foster mother as having said that her sister Zoe had had sex with "Jez". Hayley went on to say that Jez had his willy in her sister's mouth and that Zoe touched it. It is report that Hayley confirmed to her foster mother that this was what she had meant when she said her sister had sex with Jez.
100. During the joint interview however, Hayley did not disclose that she had seen Zoe being the victim of sexual abuse. In his oral evidence the father asserted that what Hayley had told her foster carer was a lie. He had not had sex with Zoe.
101. It is right to point out that the information at J8/J22 contains a lot of material gleaned from files and from a number of different sources. Much of it is hearsay and in some cases double or triple hearsay. Unless there is supporting material elsewhere, I place no weight on these reports.
102. It was put to him that the existence of the wart mentioned in Dr Atkinson's report is at least suggestive of sexual activity with him. The father said that from his own researches there could be many reasons for the existence of the wart and not necessarily the result of sexual activity.
103. At J141 is Zoe's interview dated 13^th February 1996. The social worker asked Zoe if she had started her periods. She replied:-

"Yeah, he's got it all in that black diary, it was October I missed a month." At J11, paragraph 79, there is a note to the effect that Zoe alleged that the father had a diary which noted the date of her period and he became angry with her when she missed a period and suggested that was her fault. In his oral evidence the father admitted that he had a black diary and that he was monitoring Zoe's periods but could not remember why he did it. He said it was not because he was having sex with Zoe. Zoe may have just started her periods and he was keeping an eye on the situation. I cannot think why he should have done such a thing.

104. At J122 Zoe refers to the father taking her into his bed and putting his hand on her fanny. This topic was pursued by the police officer at J123. In his oral evidence the father denied touching Zoe's fanny or that he had threatened to "destroy my family and get guns and things and kill her" if she said what the father had been doing.
105. Further, in relation to the allegation at J131 he denied inserting his penis into Zoe's vagina. He said that Zoe had lied massively about him and that all the allegations of this nature made by Zoe (see for example J147) are lies.
106. The father admitted that he and Louise had used Speed which he described as much better than cocaine. He estimated that he and Louise took Speed about once a month. This was when he was working as a DJ and bought the drugs on his way to the Club.
107. As to the harassment allegations this is dealt with in part at H384 which is Zoe's interview aged 13 on 14^th November 1997. At H384 Zoe refers to the earlier sexual assaults that were never proved. Later in the interview she deals with instances when she was harassed by the father.
108. The father admitted that in August 1997 he went to the house following his remand in prison for a period of about five weeks. He described himself as livid and beside himself. He denied getting out of the car but saw them in his words all going bonkers and freaked out in the house. He agreed that he followed Zoe to the back of the alleyway. He had parked his car in a cul-de-sac so had to turn around. He could have got out of the car and got to Zoe but did not do so. He described himself as remaining level headed and he then went home. I do not think that he was level headed during this incident. He said that he livid and beside himself. I find that such was so.
109. He knew nothing about the funeral wreaths that had been placed on the doorstep though accepted that he was the one person who was likely to have done it. He always suspected that this was done by Sheridan.
110. There was a further statement at H401 by Louise dated 27^th August 1997 and two Assistants who work at Halfords who deal with the alleged harassment by the father of Louise and Zoe. He accepted that he was found guilty of this, served a term of imprisonment and was made subject of Restraining Order.
111. In relation to Jessica he described her as a very good liar. He accepted that there was a similar pattern to his behaviour in Zoe. He said that he had been stupid to put himself into a similar situation after all the lies that Zoe had told about him. He denied that he was grooming Jessica or that he ever abused her in any way. At H79 in her interview dated 14^th May 1997 Jessica related how it was that she says he got naked into bed beside her. The father was unable to explain why that had been said. He said that he did not rape her.
112. In relation to the allegations of indecent exposure he described that in November 1999 he was a top DJ earning a great deal of money and was well known in the community. It emerged however with reference to H175 that he may have ceased acting as a DJ in 1998. The father denied that he was the man who had exposed himself as alleged. At H142 which is a passage in his police interview dated 9^th December 1999 he was asked about why it appeared that he had attempted to suggest that somebody called Craig may have been the man the police needed to see. It became clear that Craig's description was very different to that of the father. He denied trying to mislead the police about this.
113. Later in his oral evidence he referred to the two girls who sat on the wall in order to attract his attention. This was not mentioned by the father in his police interview.
114. Following the lunchtime adjournment the father returned to the witness box and said that he did not wish to answer any more questions. Following a warning about the possible consequences if he did not answer questions, he decided to continue and a number of matters were put to him as to the instances when it is said that he exposed himself to various school girls. He asserted that the girl Lucy took off her blouse and flaunted herself at him. As to Victoria he was not aware of her but could think of no reason why she might have lied. He thought that both Victoria and Natasha were mistaken as to the identification. Karen was another girl who in his words flashed her bra at him and made it all up.
115. He accepted that if he had been rightly convicted in 2001 he would represent a danger to children.
116. His explanation of that episode was that he had had a great deal to drink having been performing as a DJ at a wedding party. He realised he was going to be sick and rushed into what he thought was the men's lavatory and found a young girl in one of the cubicles. He lifted her off the seat and was sick. He denied that he ever licked the girl's vagina. At H358 it was put to him by the police in interview dated 18^th April 2001 that the DNA evidence showed that traces of saliva in the front of the girl's underpants matched the father's DNA. In his oral evidence at this hearing he asserted that the scientific evidence was wrong and that the type of DNA science used on that occasion is not used nowadays.
117. At H359 the father gave the explanation that I have just set out. It was put to him that in his first explanation (H356) he said there had been definitely no young females in that toilet.
118. His explanation at H365 was to the effect that his solicitor had told him not to mention the girl. He went on to say that the jury's verdict was wrong; he had been telling the truth and that everybody else was either mistaken or lying.
119. In relation to the allegations in respect of Amber and the episode at the swimming pool the father explained that he was in the same changing room at Amber but in a different cubicle. He was not naked in front of Amber.
120. Submissions:

I am grateful to the advocates for the careful written submissions that each has submitted. I have read them all and will deal in this judgment with the main points.

121. On behalf of the father Mr Cholerton emphasised that the burden of proof rests at all times upon the local authority and that his client does not have to prove anything.
122. The allegations concern matters covering six years between 1994 and 2001. Those relating to Zoe allegedly occurred between 1994 and 1997; those relating to Jessica between 1996 and 1997 and the allegations of indecent exposure are said to have occurred in 1999. There is the conviction recorded against the father in 2001. Although the father continues to assert that he was wrongly convicted he does not ask this court to go behind that conviction.
123. A further point raised by Mr Cholerton is the direction contained in the case of R v Lucas [1991] QB 720 as applied in A County Council v K, D & L [2005] 1 FLR 851. This, says Mr Cholerton, is especially relevant in this case as the local authority places much reliance on the lies which the authority maintains the father has told about relevant and important matters. I must assess the father's evidence overall and the fact that he has lied or has not told the truth about a particular matter does not necessarily mean he is being untruthful about another. Mr Cholerton submits that whereas the court is entitled to consider the totality of the evidence the allegations should be considered separately in order to arrive at a decision on the factual material relevant to each allegation. The court must be careful not, without more, to import any finding made against the father in relation to one set of allegations as necessarily supporting the truth of a different set of allegations.
124. The Zoe allegations.

As Mr Cholerton points out the oral witnesses in support of this should have been Zoe and Sheridan. Since these potential witnesses did not attend they were not cross-examined and therefore their statements could not be challenged. In the circumstances, submits Mr Cholerton, the local authority has been unable to discharge the burden of proof and findings in respect of those matters should not be made against the father.

125. It is accepted on behalf of the father that there a number of statements contained in the papers which include transcripts of video interviews of two other children. Those witnesses were not produced and therefore their evidence could not be challenged either. It is pointed out that the father was cross-examined on these matters and denied what was put to him. In those circumstances, it is submitted, no weight should be placed on a statement that cannot be challenged. Further, as is clear from Mr Langrish's submissions on behalf of the local authority, considerable weight is placed upon the list of people that the father says have lied about his behaviour. Once again it is submitted that there is a danger the court may fall into error if reliance is placed upon the list of people who father has said have lied.
126. Starting at paragraph 12 Mr Cholerton deals with discrepancies which occurred between the three occasions on which Zoe was interviewed. It is pointed out that on each occasion she gave additional and different information and the allegations became more serious. In her final interview Zoe admitted that part of her early interview was untrue [J289]. It is submitted at paragraph 15 that Zoe's account to the police displayed not only an ability to lie but also an ability to lie in detail. It is submitted that although transcripts of interviews provided by two others apparently support Zoe's version of events it is submitted that in the absence of the ability to challenge that evidence little if any weight should be given to statements made some 15 years earlier.
127. The Jessica allegations:

Evidence in respect of these came from Jessica and her mother (Susan). It is submitted that Jessica's evidence was inconsistent and of questionable value. Jessica said the abuse against her began in October. She says the father entered her room and touched her vagina whilst leaning over her cabin bed. The house was full of people and had three bedrooms. Jessica shared a room with Sheridan for some six months. There was a discrepancy as to whether the room contained a cabin bed or bunk beds. Despite the alleged frequency of the father's visits to Jessica's room nobody apparently heard or saw anything. In paragraph 24 of his submissions Mr Cholerton pointed out that it was Jessica's contention that the father took her into his room in the middle of the night and had sexual intercourse with her over a period of some five to six months every night. This occurred without anyone seeing anything suspicious.

128. At paragraph 26 of his submissions Mr Cholerton refers to the bundle at page H33 where it is alleged that the father had sex with Jessica and frightened her with a knife. In her latest statement Jessica said that she was confused about this and may well have been relating to the behaviour of the boyfriend she had at that time and with whom she was in an abusive relationship. She said that it was her boyfriend who had told her to make that allegation against the father and accepted that she had told a lie. She said she was 18 at the time and frightened of her boyfriend. This is different to being "a little confused" as she says in her latest statement. On page 8 of his submissions Mr Cholerton deals with a number of matters which he contends undermine the reliability of Jessica's evidence. There is confusion about who slept during which period in which bed and whether there were bunk beds or cabin beds. It does not appear that Jessica showed signs of being tired although apparently was being woken nightly by the father in order to have sex. It is said that the essential detail is missing. Further, after he left the house Jessica continued to visit the father at his house.
129. Further, it is said that Sheridan's oral evidence was important to the local authority's case in relation to items 2(a) and (c) in the schedule of allegations. Sheridan did not give evidence and it is therefore submitted little weight should be attached to it.
130. Indecent exposure:

In relation to those girls who attended the ID it is said that as he was the only man on the other side of the screen they identified a man they had already seen. Natasha, who said that she had seen the man holding his penis, she had only seen for a few seconds. Jocelyn gave a description but did not attend the ID. It is further pointed out that Karen was one of the girls who the father asserted had a crush on him and she had known him because he was well-known in the area. In respect of Karen it is also submitted that although she was certain of her identification of the father, she was unable to say how she knew his name or why she thought he was a "flasher".

131. Generally Mr Cholerton invites the court to place no weight upon the father's refusal at one point during his evidence to answer any further questions but then continued to do so following the warning about adverse inferences which might be drawn if he did not answer questions. I accept that submission and do not place an unfavourable interpretation on his short-lived refusal to answer further questions.
132. Finally, in paragraph 44 of his submissions Mr Cholerton says that the allegations either in isolation or taken globally have not been made out.
133. On behalf of the mother Ms McCreath has put in a short written document. She takes a neutral stance in respect of the findings which the local authority seeks. The allegations which form the basis of such findings pre-date the mother's relationship with the father.
134. The mother heard the whole of the father's evidence and also that of Victoria, Natasha and Jocelyn. She was not present for the entire hearing.
135. Two observations are made in respect of the father's evidence on behalf of the mother:

(1) It appeared that the father was unable to remember any events of significance, even relatively recent ones, and the mother found this difficult to believe. I accept that point.

(2) When he was able to recall an event in question, he was unable to provide any explanation or credible reason to address the allegations against him. I agree.

136. Subject to those comments the mother's position is that she will accept in full such findings as the Court may make.
137. On behalf of the local authority Mr Langrish asks the court to find all the allegations set out in the schedule at A23 to A27 are made out. The local authority's case is put upon the basis that between 1994 and 2001 the father showed himself to be a dangerous, risk-taking, predatory paedophile.
138. In his preliminary remarks in paragraph 2 of his written submissions Mr Langrish points to the details of the conviction in 2001. Secondly, it is submitted, that from the record of interview dated 5^th November 1999 [H215-218] it is clear that the father had placed pictures of himself naked and playing with himself in a sex magazine. It is pointed out that this is behaviour does not accord with a man who is ever shy in sexual relationships.
139. It is also submitted that the father continues to deny that he sexually assaulted the two-year-old girl in respect to which he was found guilty. Further, there is a contrasting picture of what he told Dr Gallwey in September 1997 [J85, 86 and 88]. It also seems, it is submitted, that he lied about these same points to the community forensic nurse in April 1997 [J75].
140. The Zoe allegations:

Starting at paragraph 6 of his written submissions Mr Langrish sets out the reasons why he contends that the allegations in respect of Zoe can be found to have been proved. It is accepted, as was the case that the court did not hear live oral evidence from Zoe as had been intended. Consequently it is accepted that less weight can be attached to her evidence.

141. The court did hear from Jessica. It was clear that when Sheridan walked in upon the father that Sheridan said to him "I thought you'd stopped this kind of thing." [H32]. It is further pointed out that both Jessica and Susan recalled seeing Zoe visit their home with the father in the absence of Zoe's mother. The father accepted that he treated Zoe considerably more favourably than her sister Hayley. It is said that both Amber and Emma witnessed sexual assaults on Zoe by the father and reported this to the police. Further, Zoe's medical report suggested that a vaginal wart had been transferred by contact with a penis or hands which had a wart [J65]. Zoe's mother (Louise) also reported having seen the father sexually abusing Zoe while on holiday in Spain in 1994 [J8]. Zoe subsequently confirmed this in interview [J132]. Further, Sheridan confirmed in her statement to the police that the father had admitted to having had a sexual "relationship" with Zoe between the ages of 9 and 12 [H21].
142. In paragraph 8 of his written submissions Mr Langrish submits that the father's evidence when cross-examined was inconsistent. He clearly had difficulty to explain what had occurred between himself and Zoe. I agree. Of particular concern, it is submitted, and I agree, is that he agreed that he kept a diary of Zoe's periods. In oral evidence he said that he could not remember why he had done so but also said that Zoe may have just started her periods and he was in his words "keeping an eye". It is difficult to see what innocent reason there can have been for this behaviour. Further, he was unable to give a satisfactory explanation as to why he resumed a relationship with Zoe's mother after she had reported him to the police in 1994 for sexually assaulting Zoe.
143. Save for Zoe's second interview which she corrects in her third interview, it is submitted that the contents of her interviews are specific and provide credible and detailed evidence. Further, they are supported, it is submitted, by the accounts of Emma and Amber who describe the events in a slightly different way. It is submitted that the father's evidence is unclear, confused and lacking in credibility. I agree. It is however accepted that in relation to the allegation at A24 1(g) there is not the level of detail in Zoe's account at interview as there is in relation to repeated sexual assaults.
144. Harassment:

In March 1998 the father was found guilty at trial of the harassment of Zoe and Louise in August 1997. In his oral evidence he said that he felt as if he "wanted to kill them". I do not accept the father's account of his visit to Louise's home. I am satisfied that he did behave to Zoe and her mother as described by them in McDonald's and that he either delivered the funeral wreaths himself or caused somebody else to do so. Further, it is clear from the two witnesses who were employees at Halford's that Mr B is likely to have behaved as Louise and Zoe say.

145. Jessica:

In his oral evidence the father seems to suggest that Jessica was making her allegations in order to help the police... He thought what she had said was shocking but, he said, she is a very good liar and a brilliant witness for the local authority being very credible.

146. It is submitted by Mr. Langrish that Jessica was an impressive witness. I agree. She became upset on one occasion during her evidence but in my judgment was doing her best to tell the court what she remembered about what had happened to her as a young girl. At paragraph 13 of his submissions Mr Langrish refers to Jessica's evidence about what the father did to her shortly before Christmas when she was aged 9. She deals with this in her statement at H33 and in her oral evidence said "I remember the pain. I remember the blood."
147. Further, in her statement she said that the father continued to rape her about three or four times a week until he moved out in February or March. When challenged as to this she said "It felt like every day."
148. In 2006 Jessica gave a more detailed statement about the assaults and in her most recent statement accepted that she had been mistaken about the alleged threat with a knife. It is submitted on behalf of the local authority that if Jessica wanted to maintain a lie and cause the father difficulty, there would be no reason for her to volunteer the fact in her 2006 statement that the detail about the knife was inaccurate. I agree.
149. In her oral evidence she said that "I know what happened and what (he) did to me. I was too scared and embarrassed to tell what had happened."
150. Jessica explained that she gave evidence because she has daughters of her own and was worried about the prospect of the father treating other young girls in the way he had treated her. It is submitted that there is no evidence that Jessica lied in 1997, 2006 or at this hearing.
151. As to Susan's evidence it is submitted that when the court considers the likelihood of the father being able to behave as he did without anybody in the house being aware of it, it seems he nevertheless managed to circumvent Susan's "house rules" whilst living there. Contrary to Susan's rules they spent time in the same room and he clearly had sexual intercourse with Sheridan. Further the evidence suggests that he, Sheridan and another lodger all had separate house keys and could come and go as they pleased. For at least some of the time that the father lived there he was working as a DJ and returned home in the early hours of the morning.
152. It is submitted that of particular relevance is Susan's evidence that the father wanted to be as he put it a "father figure" to Jessica. This, it is said, shows a similar pattern to how he described his relationship with Zoe. I agree.
153. Exposure allegations:

The court heard from four witnesses who said that, as school girls, they had seen the father exposing himself to them in the area of Talbot Woods. It seems that at this time he was not working at a DJ but was running a sandwich business and was therefore required to cycle around the area dropping off sandwiches with various customers.

154. Mr Langrish deals with these matters starting at paragraph 22 of his written submissions. It is submitted that the accounts of the four oral witnesses were supported by others who could not be traced for the purposes of this hearing, namely Leanne [H99] and Lucy [H101]. I accept the submission that the evidence against the father in relation to these allegations is overwhelming and I find them proved.
155. At paragraph 28 Mr Langrish makes certain submissions about the explanations given by the father to the police in the months following the incident which led to his conviction in 2001. There are some important differences in his explanations. For example at H348 he said that he did not touch the child at all. At H360 he entered the cubicle and lifted the child off the seat so he could be sick. At H352 he said that there was no chance that his DNA would be found on the child. but when confronted with the fact that his DNA had been found he said at H359 that he thought the saliva would be more in the stomach region so he did not think anything would come back.
156. In paragraph 31 is a list (a-r) who the father says either lied or are mistaken about his actions in relation to the four sets of allegations. I bear in mind Mr Cholerton's warning about this. I am left, however, with the evidence of the father who was a thoroughly unimpressive witness together with the contradictions that emerge between his own various statements and in contrast to the evidence from the other sources.
157. On behalf of the guardian Ms O'Hara reminds the court that the allegations are of the most serious nature, are alleged to have occurred over a long period of time and involve a wide group of child victims. It is not for the father to prove his innocence. Some of the evidence relates to events that occurred many years ago and the court has to bear that in mind when assessing the reliability of those who testify against the father. Clearly oral evidence subject to cross-examination attracts greater weight than written statements where the witness has not attended court.
158. Jessica:

She is now 28 and is married with two daughters of her own. She has still not been able to discuss the detail of her allegations with her mother, Susan. It would seem therefore that there is no evidence of collusion between mother and daughter in relation to the father's alleged behaviour. There is clearly a discrepancy between her first statement when she says the abuse was at the father's home and her second police statement where she said the abuse started in her home and moved to the father's home later. The court must consider the possibility of whether the second statement is some form of embellishment or are there good reasons why Jessica, then aged ten, felt unable, as she said, to disclose that she had been abused at home. I prefer the latter interpretation.

159. I have to consider whether it is probable that abuse at the level of frequency alleged could occur without detection in a house where there were five adults and two children living in close proximity for nine or ten months. It seems to me unlikely that the abuse was as frequent but on the other hand the court must bear in mind that Jessica was then aged 9 or 10. She is in my judgment unlikely simply to have invented what occurred, but stated what it felt like, i.e. every night.
160. It is right that Jessica volunteered she had fabricated the threat with a knife. On the one hand this could be seen as a clever way of admitting to an untruth which would seem to suggest that her other evidence, though possibly untrue, was reliable. On the other hand it could simply be a frank admission, honestly correcting earlier misinformation. Having heard her evidence I prefer the latter. Further, she also alleged that her step-father David had abused her but he was acquitted at the criminal trial. Jessica's mother still appears to be of the view that David did indeed abuse Jessica. The circumstances of a criminal trial are somewhat different to the sort of investigation conducted here. Nevertheless the fact of the acquittal is an important factor which must be put into the balance against the reliability of Jessica's evidence overall.
161. It is the case that some of the details of her account were hazy or confusing. There was difficulty about whether or not there was a cabin bed or a bunk bed or where it was that Sheridan was sleeping. This sort of detail seems to me to reveal honest confusion rather than fabricated allegations.
162. There are strong similarities between the accounts of Jessica and Zoe. There was the suggestion that the father would be a father figure and made the girls feel as if each was his girlfriend and therefore receiving special attention. The escalation of the seriousness of the abuse shows a similar pattern. There is no evidence that Jessica and Zoe colluded in their accounts.
163. It is indeed right to observe that if the father behaved as he did in Jessica's house he took an enormous risk that he would be detected. Mr Cholerton submits that it is therefore not credible that he would have behaved as alleged. On the other hand he clearly behaved in a risky and sexually gratifying manner when he exposed himself to the school girls. The same applies to the conviction for indecent assault. I accept the submission that these factors suggest that the father did engage in risky sexual behaviour. Furthermore on his own evidence while he was acting as a DJ he regularly took Speed. He generally returned late at night from the Club and it is reasonable to suppose that he was in a generally aroused state.
164. For the most part Jessica's demeanour while giving evidence was calm and straightforward. The court has to consider the question of Jessica's motivation. The process of involving herself in this hearing meant that she was asked questions about intimate and painful matters. There does not appear to be any evidence of malicious intent to repeat fabricated allegations some 20 years after the events in question. Jessica said that she wished to protect her own daughters and to prevent the same thing happening to another child.
165. The court must view Sheridan's account with caution. She did not give oral evidence. Others have described her accounts as unreliable. She minimised her own involvement in abusive behaviour but her account does support elements of the alleged abuse by the father. Ms O'Hara cites the example of Jessica being in bed with both the father and Sheridan at Jessica's home.
166. In relation to Susan's account she was still not aware of her daughter's allegations. It seems that she was pressurised by her ex-husband into allowing the father into the home. Her evidence was that the father had convinced Susan that the allegations in relation to Zoe were fabricated maliciously by mother and daughter. It is the case that the father attempted to explain Sheridan's disclosures in the same way in that they were motivated by Sheridan wanting him out of her life. As Ms O'Hara submits this technique parallels the explanations employed by the father in relation to those school girls who identified him as indecently exposing himself. He maintained that he had resisted the advances of two of the school girls which had resulted in the girls making malicious reports about him to the police. I do not accept that.
167. Susan thought it would have been possible for people to move between the bedrooms in the night.
168. The exposure allegations:

In her careful review of the evidence of Victoria, Natasha, Jocelyn and Karen, Ms O'Hara submits that the witnesses appeared to be credible. I agree. In relation to Victoria she was aware that there had been announcements at school about a "flasher" in the woods over a period of time. She had never heard the father's name until the connection with this hearing. There appeared to be no malicious motivation in her giving evidence against him. I agree.

169. Natasha was clearly distressed when she recalled the impact that the event had had upon her. She identified the father as the perpetrator at the police station. They had travelled to the police station in a school minibus with other alleged victims from the school. They had been told not to discuss the matter amongst themselves and consequently sat in silence throughout the journey. I accept the submission that Natasha appeared to be a credible witness with no prior involvement with the father and no discernible malicious motive to give false evidence against him.
170. Jocelyn's evidence was also clear and credible.
171. I accept Karen's denial that she took off her school shirt on the street and sat in her bra in order to attract the father's attention. She was clear that the man she saw in the woods was the one she knew as Jez who lived locally. I accept her evidence.
172. In relation to the father's evidence Ms O'Hara pointed out that he maintained his stance that he was innocent of all the allegations including that of indecent assault on a two-year-old girl in respect of which he had been convicted. He maintained that those who gave evidence against him had either lied or were mistaken. I accept the submission that those who made allegations against the father had no discernible motive to lie about him. Those who gave evidence at this hearing put themselves through a significant ordeal in order to do so.
173. Putting it at its lowest it is indeed curious that following Zoe's allegations in respect of which the father was held on remand, he was unable to explain why he subsequently moved into a household where he inevitably came into close contact with two young girls. His suggestion that he should adopt the role of a "father figure" is particularly concerning and suggests that he saw this as a way to gaining the child's trust.
174. A further worrying aspect of his approach to this matter is that when the father was aged about 32 in 1999 he appeared to consider that school girls aged approximately 13 might be interested in him in a physical way. A similar attitude is demonstrated in his assertion that Zoe, when aged about 9 or 10, flirted with him. Most worrying of all was both the father's decision to record Zoe's menstrual cycle in a diary and his inability to explain why he did this. I accept Mr Langrish's submission that it is difficult to see an innocent reason for such behaviour.
175. Conclusion

Zoe's allegations have an internal consistency with parts of Jessica's evidence. They were both made to feel like a special girlfriend; the alleged abuse of the girls went through similar progressions; there was the high risk of exposure within a domestic setting. The alleged pattern of behaviour is therefore very similar.

176. Zoe's allegations:

1. Whilst living with his then partner (Louise) and her children (Zoe and Hayley) between 1994-1997, F sexually assaulted Zoe then aged 9 – 11 years old.

(a) I find that the father exhibited grooming behaviour towards Zoe, for instance buying her gifts and treating her more favourably than her sister.

(b) Although I find that the father kissed Zoe on the forehead I am not satisfied on the evidence that this was in a manner that was unnatural and intimate. The material in support of this is J8. This is not a statement but a report of what others had recorded to the social services department.

(c) I find that Zoe's mother saw the father stroke Zoe's arm and to have Zoe on top of him whilst having no trousers and with his penis erect.

(d) I find that the father rubbed Zoe's breasts, and touched her pubic hair. At J125 Zoe says that the father did not put his hand into her vagina. At J63 which is Dr Atkinson's medical report Zoe is reported as telling the doctor about the father rubbing her and touching her vagina. She describes him putting his "willy" into her vagina and that full intercourse had last taken place on 10^th February 1996. Zoe did not tell the doctor that the father inserted his fingers into her vagina. Zoe's account about this part of the allegation is confusing. I do not find proved that the father inserted his fingers into her vagina on numerous occasions.

(e) I find this allegation proved.

(f) I find that the father engaged in sexual intercourse with Zoe on numerous occasions: this is referred to by Zoe in the doctor's report at J63, and is reported by her at Poole Hospital on 4^th March 1996 at J72; at J130/131 in her police interview Zoe describes the father having sexual intercourse with her. At J172 Emma (who did not give evidence at this hearing) describes the father as having sexual intercourse with Zoe. However, starting at J278 Zoe describes sexual intercourse with the father on more than five occasions although in the doctor's report she said that it occurred over 30 times in all but later said that it occurred up to five times a week.

(g) On occasion, the father gave recreational (illegal) drugs to Zoe. No oral evidence was given as to this allegation and I was not referred to any passage in the trial bundle which supported this. I therefore find this allegation not proved.

(h) The father took Zoe and her friend, Amber, swimming during a weekend in or around January 1996. Father stripped naked in front of them both and kissed Zoe. On the drive home there was inappropriate touching and masturbation between the father and Zoe witnessed by Amber. Amber was asked to kiss the father.

The father admits that he took Zoe and Amber to a swimming pool but denies the remainder of this allegation.

At J152 Zoe describes that she was in the front seat of the father's car: he pulled his pants down and made her hand go up and down on his willy while Amber watched. At J151 Zoe describes how the father stripped naked in front of Amber. I find this proved.

At J189 Amber describes how the father told her that she could kiss him and that the father kissed Zoe in the changing room after they had been swimming. . In relation to the incident at the swimming pool (J151/2) the father said that he had a vague recollection of Amber. They had used the family changing room and agree that the girls had swimming trunks on underneath their ordinary clothes. He denied Amber's allegations which he described as "more lies".

I find these allegations proved.

(i) During one weekend in or around February 1996 sexual contact between the father and Zoe was witnessed by another of Zoe's friends, Emma, in the father's bedroom. He invited Emma to kiss him and showed her sexually explicit images.

Zoe deals with this in her interview at J133. At J138/139 Zoe describes how she and the father collected another child and went Kite flying. Zoe describes how back at the house she and Amber were in the father's room on a Sunday night and he showed the girls what Zoe described as rude books. She also says that on that occasion the father had sexual intercourse with her. Emma also deals with this incident at J169 to J174. She also describes the father having sexual intercourse with Zoe at J172/173. There is a further reference to magazines by Emma at J177.

The father does not deal with this allegation in the schedule. In his oral evidence in relation to Emma's interview he said that she was lying about this. I find this allegation proved.

(j) The father threatened to kill Louise if Zoe disclosed the abuse and was frequently violent towards Louise. The father was occasionally violent towards Zoe.

At J124 in her police interview Zoe says that she was scared of the father because he threatened to destroy her family and kill her mother if Zoe told anybody about what the father had been doing to her. At J280 Zoe says that he threatened her and told Zoe not to tell her mother because if she did Zoe's family and mother would die "or something like that". In his oral evidence the father denied making any such threats. In the schedule the father denied such threats against either her mother or Zoe. He agreed that he did on one occasion meet Louise by chance in Poole. He admits that he was angry with her and asked her why she had telephoned the police and why she had got Zoe to make up lies about him to the police. I find this allegation proved.

(k) In July 1996 the father admitted to his new partner Sheridan that he had previously had sexual intercourse with Zoe when she was aged 9-12 and that it had started because Zoe "came onto him."

The father denies making any such admission. In her interview at H20 Sheridan described how on 9^th July 1996 the father began to tell her about how he had sexually abused Zoe (and in H23) having had a sexual relationship with Jessica).

There is an undated and unsigned copy of a statement made by Sheridan which I believe to be for the purpose of these proceedings. She refers to earlier statements made in 1997. It is clear that she made a number of allegations against the father in 1997. She retracted them and said that some had been made out of spite (J20/21). I am not satisfied that Sheridan's evidence in relation to this allegation is reliable and I do not find it proved.

(l) The father was found guilty (at trial) of harassment of Zoe and Louise (E168) and a 10-year Restraining Order and custodial sentence was (sic) imposed. The father had followed them when in public, parked outside the family home and sent funeral wreaths to their home.

As indicated earlier in this judgment I find these allegations proved.

2. From approximately the summer of 1996, the father and Sheridan stayed with Susan and David, who had two young children, Jessica and Natalie. The father and Sheridan subsequently moved into the father's own property. Between August 1996 and May 1997, the father sexually abused Jessica, and then aged 9-10 years old.

(a) After Sheridan and the father had moved into his property, he admitted to Sheridan that he had been having a sexual relationship with Jessica and that he was obsessed with her.

I am not satisfied that this allegation is proved (see above) in relation to 1(k).

(b) On or around August 1996 until approximately October 1996 the father regularly visited Jessica (aged 9) in her room at the family home. He kissed her and explored her vagina with his fingers. Towards the end of this period of time, the father would invite Jessica to stand up naked and he would rub his penis up and down between her legs.

The father denies the entirety of this allegation.

Jessica gave oral evidence via the video link as I have already recounted. She also made a statement for the purpose of these proceedings at C70. Her earlier police witness statement is at H31 and her police interviews at H69 and H87.

177. Having seen and heard Jessica and considered the father's evidence about these matters I am satisfied that allegations 2(a)-2(f) are proved.

3. In November 1999, the father was charged with various offences of Outraging Public Decency following children reporting a naked man in a wooded area playing with and exposing his penis.

(a) Allegation: - (f): four of the school girls gave oral evidence about this and three of them identified the father as the man concerned. He denies each and every one of these allegations. Having heard the evidence of the girls, having considered the father's responses and as earlier indicated in this judgment, I am satisfied that these allegations are proved.

4. The father was convicted of indecent assault on 30^th November 2001 (for the offence that occurred on 16-17^th December 2000). Throughout the investigation of this offence the father lied about his recollection of events and gave conflicting explanations for what had happened.

Having reviewed the material relating to this offence and apart from the conviction, I am quite satisfied that the father assaulted the girl as alleged. Further, as appears from my analysis of his evidence in relation to this, he clearly lied about his actions on that night.

HHJ Bond 10^th June 2015