THE jury in the trial of a Thame hair consultant, accused of indecent and sexual offences against women, was sent home late this afternoon.
After four hours, the jury of six men and six women, had not reached a verdict on two counts of indecent assault, and eight of sexual assault, alleged to have been committed by Praminder Mankoo.
In her summing up, the judge, Her Honour Mary Jane Howatt, explained the legal differences between ‘indecent’ and ‘sexual’ assault. Because the first two charges on the indictment against Mankoo occurred before a change in the law in 2004, they are deemed to be ‘indecent assault’ – the definition of ‘indecent’ being at that time what “right-minded persons would consider indecent in contemporary standard of modesty and decency..” This could include touching which would be made ‘indecent’ if the circumstances make it so.
Because they are alleged to have occurred after the new Sexual Offences Act came into effect on May 1, 2004, the other eight charges on the indictment are those of sexual assault. According the Act:
Sexual assault (1) A person (A) commits an offence if?
(a) he intentionally touches another person (B),
(b) the touching is sexual,
(c) B does not consent to the touching, and
(d) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
A verdict is expected tomorrow.
A report of each day’s proceedings during the previous eight days of the trial is published below.
The easiest way to read them, is to put ‘Mankoo’ in the search box (right-hand side of the Main News section of the website) and a list of related reports, in date order (earliest at the top) will appear.
Leave a Reply