\u201cThey will tell you they never saw anything inappropriate\u201d between the defendant and the complainants at his house, he said. <\/p>\n
The ex-teacher said one of the boys stayed in his home about eight to 10 times, later saying he stayed in his bed five or six times. <\/p>\n
\u201cI had a large bed and he would sleep on the side of the windows and I would sleep on … the side of the door.\u201d<\/p>\n
The defendant said his mother used to say men should sleep by the door \u201cbecause the man should be the protector so he would be awake first\u201d. <\/p>\n
Asked why he had shared the bed with the complainant, the defendant said: \u201cSimply because it was a place to sleep.<\/p>\n
\u201cSometimes, if they were available, I\u2019d put pillows down the centre of the bed but not always. It was just a matter of what was available.\u201d<\/p>\n
He claimed one of the boys only stayed in his bed once and only due to an issue with his spare bed.<\/p>\n
The ex-teacher told the court that the other complainant slept in his bedroom because he couldn\u2019t be \u201ctrusted\u201d not to steal things from other rooms in the home. <\/p>\n
Prosecutor Clare Antenen said the man had indicated in his evidence that the boys had slept in his room as there was nowhere else to sleep.<\/p>\n
He responded by saying he could not trust one of the boys not to steal and it would have been too cold in his downstairs room for the boy.<\/p>\n
However, she then reminded him that he had earlier said in evidence that other people had sometimes slept in the downstairs room. <\/p>\n
She then asked whether the two boys he acknowledged sleeping in a room with could have slept elsewhere in the home.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey were quite happy,\u201d the man said of the boys\u2019 sleeping arrangements in his room.<\/p>\n
He told the prosecutor he had shared a bed with one of the boys five or six times: \u201cIt wasn\u2019t all that many.\u201d<\/p>\n
Referring to his earlier account that they had shared a bed only once, she responded: \u201cThere\u2019s a big difference in what you said in your interview with police and what you\u2019ve said today.\u201d<\/p>\n
He told her it had been \u201c34 years\u201d since the alleged offending.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf he did [sleep in the bed] he was quite happy to, it was never compulsory.\u201d<\/p>\n
She also referenced a comment he had previously given to police about whether he found children sexually interesting. <\/p>\n
\u201cIn a vague area, possibly yes, but it\u2019s something I would never act on \u2026 A bit titillating, I suppose,” he earlier told police.<\/p>\n
In regard to one of the complainants, the defendant agreed he had taken images of him, some posed, some shirtless. <\/p>\n
\u201cI posed the top half of him in certain positions.\u201d<\/p>\n
However, and \u201cmainly\u201d because of where he got the photos developed, he said none of the images were \u201csalacious\u201d.<\/p>\n
Katie Harris is an Auckland-based journalist who covers issues such as sexual assault, workplace misconduct, media, crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2020.<\/p>\n