Alleged paedophile, Dean Adlem from Hungerford, tells jury: ‘There was no touching’
AN alleged child molester, who vehemently denies the charges, said he was bewildered by the young girl’s claims.
The 44-year-old, who has worked locally for the Canal and River trust charity, said he could think of no reason why his alleged victim had accused him.
Jurors at Reading Crown Court have been told how 44-year-old Dean Adlem, of Priory Road, Hungerford, molested the pre-teen as she lay in bed wearing only her Disney-themed nightie.
She told her parents and police how Mr Adlem repeatedly groped her bottom and stroked her vagina before she forcefully told him to stop.
On Friday, July 25, the jury heard a transcript of an interview detectives conducted with Mr Adlem, in the company of his solicitor, following his arrest.
Upon being told of the girl’s claims and being asked why he thought she might have invented them, Mr Adlem replied: “I just don’t know where she’s coming from.”
Pressed upon whether he had had any sexualised contact with her, he answered: “None; there was no touching.
“She didn’t say nothing - she just got up and went to the bathroom.”
Asked specifically whether he had pinched and stroked her bottom and rubbed her vagina, Mr Adlem responded: “No - no, no, no.”
Mr Adlem said the only contact might have been accidental, when he dropped his phone nearby as she lay in bed.”
A detective then asked: “These are serious allegations; I’m trying to understand - do you know any reason she would be saying this about you?”
Mr Adlem replied: “No, I don’t.
“I really don’t.
“She’s probably mistaken but I really don’t know why.”
During the trial the court has heard how the complainant’s mother expressed shock upon hearing her daughter recount what she said had happened.
Cross examined by Janick Fielding, defending, the mother conceded the allegations had come “out of the blue.”
Mr Fielding pressed: “You must have been surprised?”
She replied that she had been shocked and added: “It’s not something you hear every day.”
Mr Fielding continued: “Did it every occur to you she might not have been telling the truth - that she might have made false allegations against Mr Adlem?”
The mother replied, simply: “No.”
Judge Jane Rowley intervened, asking the woman: “Is (your daughter) the sort of girl that tells the truth - that, when she tells you something, you believe her?”
The mother replied: “Yes.”
Mr Fielding went on: “You told the jury that (your daughter) told you she had woken up with Mr Adlem touching her.”
Quoting the mother’s evidence back to her, he added: “She approached me and said ‘I need to tell you something that happened last night…he touched me on my bum and stroked my vagina.”
Mr Fielding added: “You told her to speak to her dad…you told the jury she said she had told you that she told him to stop - but you didn’t tell the police that, did you?
“You told the jury she said he’d put hands on her bottom and hands around her vagina - that description isn’t what’s in your (police) statement, is it?
“Is it possible someone helped (your daughter) with her account and that her account has been discussed between you and her before she spoke to police?
“Because I’m going to suggest that, as a mother receiving that sort of complaint from her child - who she believed without question - that there’s an awful lot of detail that you told the jury she said that never made it into your statement.
“Is that because she didn’t say that, and you’re telling the jury this now, having discussed the evidence with her?”
The mother replied: “No.”
Mr Fielding asked: “You simply accepted what you say she told you, is that correct?”
The mother again replied, simply: “Yes.”
The trial, which is expected to conclude this week, continues.
