Allegations of sexual assault against a teacher were "coerced'' out of the young women who testified against him by a counsellor with a grudge against the accused man, according to Magistrate Edward King, who found the teacher not guilty of two counts of sexual assault.

Yesterday's verdict came two weeks after the teacher's trial on charges which stemmed from alleged incidents in 1988 and 1996. The teacher -- who cannot be named for legal reasons -- is unemployed having been suspended shortly after students' complaints were lodged.

"I hope you get a job soon, sir,'' Mr. King said to the teacher as he left the court room yesterday.

The man is alleged to have touched girls on their breasts on two occasions, the first alleged incident taking place in a parking lot in 1988, when the teacher and student had lunch in the man's parked car.

According to the girl the meal ended with the teacher putting his hand inside her shirt and squeezing her breast saying, "you've got nice tits.'' The second incident was said to have taken place last year in the teacher's classroom. The girl, who claimed to have been assaulted during a lesson, also admitted resenting the defendant because he had disciplined her in the past.

She said that in 1996 she leaned across the teacher's desk to get help with a problem. She told the Court her teacher had put his hand inside her shirt to grab her necklace, and in doing so had brushed his fingers against her breasts.

Mr. King said he found both girls' testimony "unreliable.'' In forming his opinion, he said he had also taken notice of the defendant's relationship with the counsellor who had dealt with complaints against the teacher.

According to the defendant he, "did not have a relationship of mutual respect'' with the counsellor saying he had, "lively, if not fierce, debates regarding different philosophies.'' The Magistrate pointed out the 1996 incident was said to have taken place in a classroom full of students, and that the girl had said she had not complained at the time it took place because she, "didn't believe it could have been intentional.'' "The way I see it,'' Mr. King said, "she was coerced into thinking that something happened, afterward. In her first statement to the Police, she said he `rubbed' her breasts. When she testified in Court she said he `brushed' them. She certainly coloured that allegation when she made her Police statement.'' Before declaring the teacher not guilty of assaulting the girl, Mr. King said her testimony was "unreliable, unconvincing and tainted by malice.'' The counsellor's relationship with the defendant was also cited in Mr. King's evaluation of the testimony about the alleged assault in the teacher's car.

The Magistrate pointed out the girl had waited over seven years to tell about the incident, and only did so after the counsellor told her of similar complaints by students.

"The veracity of her evidence was in question from the start,'' Mr. King said. "If she told no one about the incident, as she said, how would the counsellor have known to seek her out in the first place?'' Mr. King pointed to a number of other inconsistencies in the girl's testimony: her inability to recall details, her confusion over dates and times as well as the different versions of the incident told at different times to the Police and in Court.

The Magistrate said her allegations were the result of "coercion'' by the counsellor and her memory was, in his opinion, "clouded by time and embellished by fantasy.'' The teacher was suspended on half pay in December, shortly after the students' complaints were first lodged. His contract was not renewed after it expired at the end of the 1996 7 academic year.

Following the not guilty verdicts, the teacher's lawyer, Richard Hector, said he would be approaching the man's employers with a view to, "seeing what could be done,'' for his client.