Graeme Dott subjected children to ‘worst kind of abuse’, court told

Former snooker world champion Graeme Dott “subjected young children to the worst kind of abuse”, a lawyer has told a court.

The 49-year-old is accused of lewd, indecent and libidinous behaviour towards two primary school age children.

The allegations span from 1993 to 1996 involving a girl; and 2006 to 2010 involving a boy; both in the Glasgow region.

Dott has denied the two charges against him.

Giving her closing speech to the jury at the High Court in Glasgow on Friday, advocate depute Lindsey Dalziel called on the jury to find Dott guilty of both charges.

“The evidence in this case has not been easy to listen to at times,” she said.

“I suggest the reason for that is you have heard very real, very graphic details of childhood sexual abuse.

“The Crown’s case is that Graeme Dott subjected vulnerable children to the worst kind of abuse with a course of conduct which relied on opportunity, for his own gratification.”

She told the jury they might find it “inherently compelling” that two different alleged victims had come forward at different times, and given reports of abuse by Dott that contained “so many similarities”.

She also said Dott would have had sufficient opportunity to carry out the alleged abuse as it was described by the witnesses.

Ms Dalziel praised the “level of detail” given by the first alleged victim about a number of instances of alleged abuse, which she said had started with Dott “caressing” her bottom over her clothing while giving her a piggy back.

“She did not just give details of that happened,” Ms Dalziel said of the witness. “She gave details about what she felt, what the sensations were, what the smells were.

“I suggest she was a straightforward and credible witness, doing her best to tell the truth.”

Ms Dalziel also said it was “natural” that there were differences in the accounts the woman had given to different people when she first reported the alleged abuse, adding it “shows the evidence is not rehearsed”.

The lawyer also praised the “crystal clear” evidence given by the second alleged victim, who told the court on Thursday that Dott had touched him inappropriately on a number of separate occasions.

“Did he seem to be reaching for facts, or did that come quite easily to him?” the advocate asked the jury of the alleged victim’s evidence.

“I would suggest (he) was a compelling witness. He was relaxed, conversational, keen to give detail and description,” she said.

In his closing speech, Dott’s lawyer Euan Dow said there were flaws in the evidence both alleged victims had provided to the court, and he invited jurors to clear his client of both charges.

“You would need to hold the complainers as credible and reliable, that you could depend upon them,” he said.

“In my submission to you, you should not accept either as credible or reliable.”

He pointed to inconsistencies from the first alleged victim, saying there were “differences” in the accounts she gave people to whom she first reported the allegations in the years following the alleged abuse.

He also said she did not mention some of the more “serious” allegations to people she confided in at the time, despite one of them asking her directly whether Dott had “touched her anywhere else”.

Mr Dow asked the jury: “What does that tell you about the truthfulness of what she was saying in evidence?

“Common sense tells you there is only one truth. All of these differing accusations cannot be right.

“Do you just put these difference down to matters of detail, understandable in the circumstances, or actually do they expose a number of real concerns about (her) evidence?”

He also said the woman had repeatedly refused offers from confidants to get the police involved, despite, he said, having been old enough by then to know that what she alleges happened to her would have been “wrong”.

Mr Dow described the testimony of the second alleged victim as “unsupported” by any other evidence, and said parts of it were at odds with the “forthright and straightforward” evidence provided by other witnesses.

“The Crown invite you to accept the frequently shifting evidence of (the first complainer) and the unsupported evidence of (the second complainer) as compelling, and convict Graeme Dott of these serious charges on that evidence,” he said.

“Do you consider these sources of evidence to be dependable?”

The trial, before judge Lord Harrower, continues, with the jury expected to retire to consider its verdict on Monday.