Glitter accuser's account 'untrue'
A woman who claims former glam rock singer Gary Glitter tried to rape her as she slept denied the allegations were "completely and utterly" untrue.
The 70-year-old - real name Paul Gadd - is said to have climbed into the schoolgirl's bed, smelling of alcohol and tobacco, and assaulted her as she lay with her back to him.
But the girl who was aged under 10 at the time waited almost 24 years before going to police, London's Southwark Crown Court heard.
The alleged victim says she was only able to move away from the singer by falling into a cocoon formed by the sheets being tucked under the mattress.
However, in cross-examination Sallie Bennett-Jenkins QC, defending, put it to the woman that this could not have been the case.
She said: "I suggest that was wrong, that all the items in the house were duvets."
"That is wrong," replied the woman.
Ms Bennett-Jenkins suggested that the room had been "pitch black" and that the youngster had not seen Glitter walk into the room or get into the bed.
The woman agreed.
Ms Bennett-Jenkins continued: "Were you aware that Gary Glitter had serious surgery on his throat in September 1974?"
The witness said she had not known this.
She also agreed that after the alleged attack in 1975 Glitter fell asleep on the bed and when she returned from the bathroom he was no longer there.
The woman had previously told jurors that she remembered a sweet room in the basement of the house where she was allegedly attacked.
But after being shown a plan of the property she conceded that this could not have been the case as there was no basement.
Ms Bennett-Jenkins said: "I am going to suggest that your account of the events are completely and utterly untrue. It simply didn't happen, did it?"
The woman asserted: "It did happen."
Dressed in a slate grey jacket, black trousers, maroon scarf and sporting his trademark dark glasses Glitter followed proceedings carefully with the help of lip-speaking interpreters.
Glitter, from Marylebone in central London, denies the attempted rape of the girl, and an alternative count of indecent assault.
He also denies six further counts of indecent assault, and two other sexual offences, relating to two young fans.
In each case both youngsters are said to have first met the singer in his dressing room after a concert that their mothers had taken them to.
The similarities also stretched to each girl initially being introduced to Glitter in the the presence of her mother and the mother then being persuaded to leave her daughter alone with him, jurors heard.
One woman claims she was just 12 when the singer allegedly plied her with champagne and then assaulted her in a hotel room.
It was put to the woman that the events she described could not have occurred in 1975 because the house had not yet been bought.
Ms Bennett-Jenkins again suggested the accusations had been made up. She said: "These allegations are totally untrue and you have been exposed by the chronology."
The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, replied: "No I have not. It might look like that, but I haven't.
"If there have been mistakes with the chronology, I can't defend that, but what I can say is that everything I remember about the events I remember as clear as if it was yesterday."
In re-examination by prosecutor John Price QC, jurors heard that in her early police statements the woman had told detectives she may have been unsure about the dates.
He also asked the woman about her decision to come forward with the allegations after Glitter was charged with child pornography offences in 1998.
But jurors heard the matter did not make it to trial on that occasion, leaving the woman "devastated". Mr Price said: "Why had you gone to the police in the first place?"
The alleged victim replied: "Because I wanted to face him for what he did and I also wanted - I hoped that other people would also. I wanted them to know that there was more that he did, apart from what he had been charged with."