Jurors have started deliberations in the trial of a former Jersey Catholic priest who is accused of using a child to satisfy his foot fetish.
Piotr Antoni Glas (61) denies seven counts of committing an act of gross indecency against a child. Jurors heard six days of evidence and a day of closing speeches before starting their deliberations this afternoon.
The alleged victim previously described how the priest would lie at their feet and how they could see and hear him masturbating. On one occasion, according to the prosecution, the priest had trapped the child’s head between his legs, with the child’s face against his groin.
He was left with a black eye, the court heard, after the child freed themselves.
During the trial, jurors also heard how the child found a bag of socks at the priest’s home and pictures of feet on his computer. The priest admitted this was the case and that he had what he called an “issue” with feet since he was a teenager.
But he denied his motivations were sexual.
He said during his evidence that he had “never, ever” sexually abused the child.
The complainant later recorded two phone calls with Mr Glas, in which they confronted their alleged abuser.
In her closing speech, Crown Advocate Carla Carvalho, prosecuting, quoted back some of what Mr Glas had told the complainant when confronted: “I am devastated with myself, how I hurt you. I beg you for your mercy and forgiveness.
“I do apologise for all the damage I have done. There are no words of explanation I could use to apologise you and no chance in human way to fix it… My life is in your hands. I am so so sorry.”
Advocate Carvalho said: “There is, members of the jury, no stronger evidence of guilt than an individual’s own admission of it.
“Make no mistake… the message is an admission, a confession.”
Advocate Carvalho also read messages from Mr Glas in which he said he was responsible for the alleged victim’s “broken childhood”.
These, she said, “should tell you all you need to know about what was happening”.
She said that Mr Glas “groomed” the complainant and their family before inviting the child first to walk on his back and then on his front, before building up to the alleged offences.
She said Mr Glas was in a “deep state of denial” and that he was not prepared to accept what he had done to the child.
Crown Advocate Simon Thomas, defending, pointed to the complainant having said that they had “buried” the memories.
The calls in which the priest was confronted were made without giving the priest any time to prepare, he added, and it was not clear to the priest what exactly he was being criticised for – because, in the defence’s argument, the allegations were made up.
“We say that these calls do not contain clear and unequivocal admissions,” the advocate said.
The court also heard a number of positive character references for Mr Glas.
He is a man of “good character”, Advocate Thomas argued, with no previous offences.
Follow Express for updates…