Court hears County Antrim man (60) who allegedly 'intentionally incited' girl to 'engage in sexual activity' was attacked at his address

Court hears County Antrim man (60) who allegedly 'intentionally incited' girl to 'engage in sexual activity' was attacked at his address

A 60-YEAR-OLD County Antrim man who allegedly 'intentionally incited' a teenage girl 'to engage in a sexual activity' has been attacked in his address, a court heard.

The charges faced by Stanley Richmond, whose address had previously been listed as in Cullybackey, relates to April this year.

He is also charged with having a 'sexual communication' with the child.

The accused appeared at Ballymena Magistrates' Court on Thursday where the case was sent to Antrim Crown Court.

A defence lawyer told an earlier hearing connected with the charge it was possible an "expert psychiatric report" would be required.

The earlier court heard the accused's bail conditions included "not to enter the grounds and buildings of the 'Green Pastures' Church".

He was also to have "no unsupervised contact with anyone under 18 unless approved by police or social services".

At court this week, a defence lawyer asked for a reporting restriction on the defendant's new bail address.

The defence lawyer told the court "unfortunately, there was an attack on the defendant" at his former address in Cullybackey.

A police officer told Thursday's Court the PSNI had no objections to the new bail address.

District Judge Anne Marshall asked the officer why there was a bail condition relating to the accused not entering a church.

The officer said that was "where" the alleged offence "happened" and the "victim and the witnesses all attend that church".

The officer confirmed the defendant had been "attacked" at his address.

The judge noted the investigating police officer was of the opinion "that was likely to happen again".

Judge Marshall said she was making a reporting restriction on the defendant's new address due to the "risk of attack" on the accused and "his property if that address was to be disclosed".

An application for legal aid for the defendant was declined by the judge after the court was told he had "substantial savings".

The judge said: "I am not sure why the taxpayer should be expected to fund the defence of this case when the defendant has that amount of savings".

The case was adjourned to the Crown Court on a date to be fixed.