|
Jurors have spent a fourth day deliberating their verdicts in the case of seven people accused of child abuse dating back 40 years in Hampshire.
The abuse is alleged to have taken place in the New Milton area of the New Forest between 1968 and 2007. The charges relate to six victims.
Five men and two women on trial at Southampton Crown Court deny all the charges against them.
Two other men were cleared on the directions of the judge on 20 October.
Terence Shave, 65, of Bramshaw Way, New Milton, was cleared of indecent assault dating back to the 1970s.
Court of Appeal ruling
Patrice Budd, of Avon Road, Bournemouth, Dorset, was also cleared of indecency with a child dating back to the 1970s.
The remaining defendants are:
• Michael Brooks, 66, of Church Lane, Lymington, charged with five counts of cruelty to a person under 16 years, five counts of indecent assault, five counts of rape and one count of sexual activity with a child.
• Maureen Brooks, 63, of Church Lane, Lymington, charged with five counts of cruelty to a person under the age of 16.
• Nico Sharque, 45, of Rudd Close, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, charged with one count of indecent assault.
• Patricia Harris, 57, of Hare Lane, New Milton, charged with one count of attempted rape.
• Ian Whitlock, 66, of Cull Lane, New Milton, charged with one count of indecent assault and one count of sexual assault.
• John Wells, 58, of St James Street, Brighton, charged with one count of indecent assault.
• Peter Saville, 64, of Winston Way, Ringwood, charged with one count of sexual activity with a child.
'Sexual indulgence'
Jurors retired on Friday after a fourth day of deliberations.
During the trial, the court heard the case centred on Mr and Mrs Brooks.
David Bartlett, for the prosecution, said the defendants lived a "life of freewheeling and often alcohol-fuelled sexual indulgence".
But the court also heard from witnesses who said that in their dealings with the pair, they were not aware of any sexual abuse taking place.
Michael Brooks was judged unfit to plead but a Court of Appeal ruling meant the jury will decide if he committed the alleged acts.
|
Bookmark with:
What are these?