A 48-year-old lawyer, who denied that he was masturbating in a public place, may not have a case to answer Magistrates? Court heard yesterday.

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded not guilty to indecent exposure, prowling and masturbating in a public place, namely the Panorama Residential Complex, on Astwood Road, Paget.

Defence lawyer Mark Pettingill argued that the only eyewitness, Peter Clark, could not have made a positive identification in the few seconds that he had seen him.

But Crown counsel Oonagh Vaucrossen disagreed and said the few seconds were sufficient for identification for the eyewitness, who had identified his shirt, sandals, hair colour, gait and the area was well lit.

Mr. Clarke said on the night of November 26, of last year, he had gone outside to put the trash out when he noticed a man standing suspiciously in the yard across the road. Mr. Clark said he went closer and the man was crouching while attempting to look into a window.

Mr. Clark then said the prowler walked across the lawn and began peering into another window and at that point he began masturbating even faster.

?I shouted at him and without him even turning around, he ran off and I chased him for about five to six seconds,? said Mr. Clark, who said he turned around and ran into his kitchen, grabbed his car keys and his mobile phone and called 911.

He said when he reached the junction of South and Astwood Road he saw the same man, but he now had on a pair of bluish-green shorts. He said he told the Police that he had spotted the prowler on South Road and continued to follow him until the Police arrived and arrested him on Rural Hill.

Det. Sgt. Barry Richards said when he arrived, the defendant was sitting on a low wall on the side of the road. He said he and Det. Con. Jasmine Saltus interviewed the accused twice over the next two days.

Det. Sgt. Richards read in the statements made by the defendant in which he had detailed a list of events from that evening, which included a visit to a female friend?s house where he watched football, before leaving to catch a bus home.

Mr. Pettingill asked the detective if he had called the woman mentioned in the statement, and he said: ?No, because he (the defendant) was claiming to have left her house at 10.30 and it was 10.20 when I arrived on the scene.?

More court, Page 5