A NINETEEN-year-old girl was sexually assaulted by a “scruffy looking” stranger as she sat on a bench overlooking a city centre park, a court heard.
The middle-aged man later accused of carrying out the assault claimed the girl’s account of what happened was completely wrong and that he was not in Portland Square when the sexual assault was committed.
But after a trial at Carlisle’s Rickergate court, 44-year-old Daniel Cameron, who denied all wrongdoing, was found guilty, with magistrates ruling that the victim had accurately identified him as her attacker.
The conviction came after the Cameron repeatedly insisted that he had never sexually assaulted anybody in his life.
During the trial, prosecutor George Shelley described how the girl was sitting on a bench in Portland Square’s small park area in the early afternoon of August 23 last year, waiting for her sister to return from an appointment.
Cameron walked up to the bench, sat beside her and began talking to her, asking lots of questions, the court heard.
He also asked the woman to remove her mask so that he could "see her smile", asked her to play music on her phone and then asked her about university, said Mr Shelley. At one point, Cameron patted the teenager’s head.
He also then asked her for “hugs and kisses,” and leant towards her as he tried to kiss her, said Mr Shelley.
In her evidence, she described the stranger then touching her, putting his hand inside her top as she tried to wriggle away from him.
“You asked this lady if she wanted to go back to your house for sex,” said Mr Shelley.
Cameron denied this. In his evidence, he repeatedly said he had never seen the girl and accused her of "making up" the allegations. At the time of the assault, he said, he had gone to Fusehill Street to buy cigarettes.
Reacting to the prosecutor’s questions, Cameron said: “It makes me want to cry; it makes me want to commit suicide…. I’m quite good at personal boundaries and people’s personal space.”
In earlier evidence, Cameron admitted that on that day he drank two litres of cider and a bottle of beer but he insisted he was only “moderately tipsy.”
He said the case would "ruin" his life and called the prosecution “disgusting.” There was no evidence of his DNA found on the teenager’s skin, he said.
The court also heard that the victim had described the man who sexually touched her as “scruffy,” with long hair and a red jacket.
Earlier in the day, she had seen the same man lying down in Portland Square as police carried out a welfare check on him. She filmed that encounter – and said the man involved was the person who later sexually assaulted her.
There was also evidence from the police officers who dealt with Cameron, including one who said the defendant had referred to “tantric sex.” He denied this.
Mr Shelley said the teenager had no reason to invent her account or to misidentify the man who was responsible for it. Her evidence was consistent, detailed and credible, he said.
Kate Hunter, defending, said magistrates should be clear that they were “absolutely sure” it was Cameron who had sexually assaulted the teenager. Only then could they safely convict him of the offence.
“He does not know what happened to her but it certainly wasn’t him,” she added.
Delivering their guilty verdict, magistrates told the defendant, whose address was given as Raven Nook, Carlisle: “We are satisfied that you were properly identified by [the victim]. We find her to be a credible witness.
“We are sure that you pestered her and subsequently assaulted her…”
Magistrates noted how the teenager's identification of Cameron as the attacker matched the person she had filmed earlier in the park when police did the welfare. They declined further jurisdiction for the case, saying their sentencing powers were insufficient.
They sent the case to Carlisle Crown Court for a sentence hearing on January 31. In the meantime, a background report will be prepared by the Probation Service to assist the sentencing judge.
The defendant was granted bail on condition that he has no contact with the victim or other prosecution witnesses.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article