ANOTHER BRITISH PEDOPHILIA ACCUSATION PUNISHES THE INNOCENT

You are guilty unitil proven innocent in child-abuse cases. And no word of the false accuser being charged with perjury

Ii is a question as old as the act of protest itself: "What price justice?" In the case of David Luxford, the answer is easy; 96,586.14 pounds. That is how much Luxford's wife, Greer, spent in proving that he was wrongly convicted not once, but twice, of raping a 13-year-old girl. Luxford, a family man with no previous criminal record, was languishing in prison, sharing a wing with the paedophile and former music impresario Jonathan King, when it first dawned on Greer to "go private" for justice. If you could pay for a second opinion from a doctor or fork out on private education for your child, why not hire a team of detectives to investigate your husband's case?

Five months later, after almost three years' of incarceration, David Luxford was a free man when the private investigation proved that he could not possibly have committed the crimes of which he was convicted. It was an inquiry that highlighted how very differently things can turn out for a defendant when there are the resources to conduct an exhaustive investigation.

David Luxford had never imagined in his wildest dreams that his freedom would one day depend on the work of a gumshoe. Now aged 38, he was a postman living and working quietly in Orpington, Kent, when, in February 2000, he was accused by a 26-year-old woman of having raped her 13 years earlier. Greer, now 51, takes up the story. "We had been out one night and when we came home there was a piece of paper that had been slipped under the door asking David to contact the Police Child Protection Unit in Catford," she says. "There was no explanation and at first we were concerned that something had happened to our daughter, Sara." Sara, now 14, was away on holiday and the Luxfords were quickly able to establish that she was fine. The next day, Luxford contacted a friend in the police to ask what could be the matter. He was advised to take a lawyer with him when he went to see the child protection team.

When he turned up, frightened of the unknown, he was told that a woman - we shall call her Kimberley - had alleged that he had repeatedly raped her between 1988 and 1989. "I listened to what they had to say and I took it all in and then I just burst into tears," Luxford recalls. "It was as if my whole world had collapsed around me. I had done absolutely nothing wrong and here I was, 13 years after the supposed events, being asked to prove a negative. She had made all sorts of allegations against me and all I could do was say, no, I didn't do it. But from the very start, I got the impression that the police believed her instead of me."

After the interview, Luxford went outside and told Greer and his father, also David, what had happened. "I asked him straight away, `Did you do it?' and he said `No'," says Greer. "I believed him completely." The following July, after a five-day hearing at the Old Bailey, Luxford was convicted of two charges of rape and one of indecent assault. There was no medical evidence and no corroboration. The jury apparently believed that Kimberley was a better witness than Luxford. Sentencing was deferred for two months and then he was given a total of seven years in prison.

"It was her word against mine," he says. "But whereas she came up with all these very emotional allegations in great detail, all I could say was `I didn't do it'. When I was sentenced I tried to keep my composure but when they took me down to the cells I just burst into tears. I must have cried solidly for 12 hours. "I was taken to Belmarsh prison but I wasn't put on the wing with the sex offenders - the `vulnerable prisoners' unit' - so I had to lie about what I was in for. I claimed I'd been involved in postal fraud. If the other prisoners knew I was supposed to have raped a child, they'd have torn me to pieces. I lived in fear of being found out all the time. Eventually, I had to be housed on the same paedophile wing as Jonathan King. I think that was even worse."

In May 2001, some new evidence earned Luxford an appeal which resulted in three judges ordering a retrial. That took place in November 2001 but it was essentially a re-run of the first. "It went exactly the same way - no medical evidence, no other witnesses and the jury simply believing her word over mine," says Luxford. "I thought that was it. I'd just have to do the time

Greer, however, was having none of it. All along, she and Luxford had enjoyed the support of hundreds of friends and family who believed in his innocence. One friend in particular, Colin Richardson, suggested that they consider employing a private detective. Greer wasn't convinced but she had reached the point where she would try anything.....

Cooper and his team revisited all the evidence and began tracking down witnesses. With a few exceptions, Kimberley had alleged that all the sexual abuse had taken place around 4am before Luxford set off for work as a postman. "Timing was very important - I couldn't see how David could possibly have had time to carry out the abuse," Cooper says. "Greer testified that she set the alarm for 4am on her side of the bed. When it went off, she woke David up and went to make tea. He had to wash and dress for work, drink his tea and then walk to a certain point where he was picked up at 4.30am by a Post Office van. "I walked every route of that walk and we tracked down all the drivers who used to pick him up. Every one said he had never been late for the pick-up.

"Kimberley gave detailed statements which, in general, followed the same pattern. My colleagues and I re-enacted what she said took place - and it lasted 57 minutes. "But if David was never late, he was supposed to have got up at 4am, washed, dressed for work, had tea with his wife, walked to an alloted point and abused Kimberley for 57 minutes all in the space of half an hour. It wasn't possible. There is evidence that Kimberley had been infatuated with David."

Cooper and his colleagues also tracked down and interviewed former boyfriends of Kimberley's. One, who met her after the alleged abuse took place, gave evidence to say that she had told him she was a virgin. She had told the court she was a virgin before the alleged abuse took place, but another boyfriend gave a statement to the effect that he had had sex with her before the abuse began - a clear inconsistency.

On November 5, 2003, three Appeal Court judges ruled that Luxford’s conviction was “unsafe” and he was immediately freed.

(Excerpt from The Times)


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)