Jailed priest starts appeal over verdict
APRIEST who was jailed for 17 years after he was convicted of sexually abusing a teenage boy has won the first stage of his fight to clear his name.
Michael Higginbottom, 74, allegedly subjected the boy to repeated sex assaults while he was working as a teacher at a seminary in Lancashire in the 1970s.
The Catholic clergyman was accused of abusing the youngster in his living quarters at St Joseph’s College, in Upholland, near Skelmersdale.
He was convicted in April at Liverpool Crown Court of eight sex offences and jailed for 17 years.
But Higginbottom, of Newcastle, continues to claim his innocence and has now been granted the right to an appeal by the UK’s top judge.
A Court of Appeal panel, led by Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett, said Higginbottom has an “arguable” case that his convictions should be quashed.
The judge, sitting with Mr Justice Teare and Mr Justice Kerr, granted permission for a full hearing of Higginbottom’s challenge.
During his trial, jurors heard that Higginbottom had a reputation for using or threatening physical punishment of pupils.
His victim, who by the time of the trial was in his 50s, said he would be called to Higginbottom’s room, with the threat of punishment if he did not attend.
There, he was allegedly subjected to sex attacks.
Higginbottom was convicted of four indecent assaults and four other sex offences.
In his evidence, the victim told jurors that “being left alone at Upholland” was “worse than death”.
Launching the appeal, Higginbottom’s lawyers argued that his convictions were unsafe due to a mistake in the trial judge’s ruling on what evidence went before the jury.
Granting permission to appeal, Mr Justice Teare said there is “an arguable point” as to whether evidence of a charge of fraud made against the complainant should have been included.
“It appears to this court that there is an arguable point as to whether or not the judge ought to have admitted the evidence of the charge of fraud,” he told the court.
The judge added: “It is not possible for this court today to consider the submission by counsel for the crown, namely that the conviction was nevertheless safe.
“That would require a detailed examination of the evidence in this case.
“We, therefore, give permission to appeal.”
No date was set for the full hearing of Higginbottom’s appeal.