Judge in Glitter sex case deplores payment to alleged victim

The judge in the Gary Glitter indecent assault case yesterday criticised the contract between the pop star's alleged victim and the News of the World, under which she will be paid £25,000 if he is convicted.

In his summing up, Mr Justice Butterfield told the jury: "Here is a witness who first made public her allegations of sex abuse in return for the payment of £10,000 and who stands to make another £25,000 if you convict the defendant on any of the charges.

"That is a highly reprehensible state of affairs. It is not illegal, but it is greatly to be deprecated."

The judge also remarked on the age of the girl - 14 - at the time of the alleged offences. "Well, there is 14 and there is 14. Some 14-year-olds look like sophisticated young ladies, a nightmare for many publicans. And some 14-year-olds still look like little girls. You may wish to consider which category the girl was in."

The jury of eight men and four women at Bristol crown court was sent home for the night after failing to reach a verdict on any of the charges against Glitter. They had deliberated for four and a half hours.They will resume deliberations this morning.

The flamboyant glam rock singer, a divorced father of two, is charged under his real name of Paul Francis Gadd with four counts of indecently assaulting a girl under 16 and four counts of buggery involving the same girl. All the offences are alleged to have taken place between March 1980, and June 1982.

Glitter, who did not give evidence, denies the charges.

The court has heard how the woman, now married with three children, received £10,000 for telling her story to the News of the World in November 1997, after the singer was arrested in Bristol in an unrelated child pornography inquiry. The woman, who had a 12-year relationship with Glitter, cannot be named for legal reasons.

In his summing up, the judge invited the jury to take the woman's suggestion that she might not accept the further payment of £25,000 with "a healthy degree of scepticism".

He said the payments did not mean the jury would necessarily reject the evidence of the woman, whom he described as having put on a "bravura" performance in the witness box.

But he added: "If you think there is any reasonable possibility that she, either for the motives suggested or for any other reasons, invented her account and came into this court and told here a pack of lies, you will disregard her evidence and find the defendant not guilty on all charges. And you will confine this case to the dustbin marked 'history'.

"But if you conclude that despite all that you are sure she has told the truth, you are fully entitled to rely on her evidence."