Beach sex trial begins

A jury must decide whether a naked man who sexually assaulted a five-year-old girl near a stream at Cooks Beach was serial flasher Nathan Rossiter – or if it was someone else.

Nathan Henry Rossiter, 38, of Hamilton, is on trial in the Hamilton District Court on a single charge of doing an indecent act on a girl under 12. The alleged incident happened almost five years ago near an estuary at the beach’s northern end. It was about 7.30pm on January 5, 2013 when the completely naked man – who the Crown allege was Rossiter – approached two children who were making their way home along a path through bushes.

It is alleged Rossiter asked the children if they had the time, before he grabbed the girl and pressed his crotch into her face. While the defence case does not dispute that what the girl says happened to her did happen, Rossiter’s counsel Sheila Cameron said they contested it was Rossiter who did it.

The Crown’s evidence – including DNA evidence yet to be presented to the court – was purely circumstantial, she said in her opening address yesterday.

‘‘The issue in this case is clearly one of identity … The robustness of this [DNA] evidence is highly contested. What happens if this one strand frays? Suspicion is not enough … Given the circumstantial nature of this case and the evidence, how can you possibly be sure?’’

Crown prosecutor Rebecca Mann said cellphone records placed Rossiter squarely in the vicinity of Cooks Beach that day. A sample of DNA taken from the cheek of the girl had been deemed 420 times more likely to have come from Rossiter than the girl or a member of her family, she said.

Mann also revealed to the jury of seven men and five women that Rossiter had two previous convictions, in 2005 and 2006, for doing an indecent act in a public place.

In the first of these, he had exposed himself while masturbating to an 11 and a

12-year old, while in the second he made himself visible to two

16-year-old girls. Mann said Rossiter had also gone to the Hamilton Police Station in January

2012 ‘‘concerned with his sexual urges’’.

He told a police detective he had been taking surreptitious photos of females in parks and beaches, and also was hiding behind bushes before exposing himself to them as they walked by. He had subsequently contacted the same detective in September that year, saying ‘‘he was concerned he may revert to old habits’’, however he was aware of his ‘‘triggers’’ and knew not to go to beaches and parks, where he might be compelled to do similar acts.

The girl’s father gave evidence in which he recounted his memories of what happened that day.

About 7.30pm they decided to leave the beach for their accommodation. Two of the children – the victim and a cousin – ran ahead of the main group and just out of sight. The father said he became aware of some commotion happening up ahead.

‘‘I saw [the victim’s cousin] running back screaming ‘Bad man’ and crying. I just sprinted off as fast as I could looking for that person.’’

He lost the trail, however other witnesses immediately approached him and said they’d seen a naked man jump into a car.

His daughter ‘‘was crying and seemingly in shock’’. The jury were played a videotaped recording of the girl being interviewed three days after the alleged incident in which she also spoke about ‘‘the bad person’’.

He was ‘‘a little bit skinny with lots of brown hair’’, she said. She had pushed his stomach and had managed to get away.

The trial continues.