HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE v. ANDREW ROY ROOSE

"Andrew Roy Roose, born 30 May 1960, ... you are indicted at the instance of The Right Honourable The Lord Hardie, Her Majesty's Advocate, and the charges against you are that (1) on various occasions between 6 March 1995 and 25 September 1995, both dates inclusive, at the house then occupied by you at --------------------, Edinburgh you did conduct yourself in a shamelessly indecent manner towards K.S. born 22 June 1981, care of Lothian and Borders Police, Edinburgh and then the girlfriend of D. A., -------------, Edinburgh, the brother of Alison A., then residing with you at said

------------------- and did ask her to kiss you, seize her by the arm, kiss her on the lips, handle her legs, make indecent remarks to her, seize hold of her, remove her clothing and have sexual intercourse with her; ..."

Counsel for the accused has challenged the relevancy of that Charge on the ground that the facts set out in the libel cannot constitute the common law crime of "shameless indecency". Although it is accepted that this is a matter which should have been dealt with at a preliminary diet, because of the fundamental nature of the objection I have thought it incumbent on me to entertain the submission this morning in advance of calling on the accused to plead to the indictment.

So far as this matter is concerned, it is accepted by the Crown that nothing more is alleged against the accused than that on various occasions he had intercourse with a girl aged between 13 and 14 years. It is also accepted that, since 1885, such conduct has been rendered criminal by statute but that, for whatever reason, Parliament has required that the statutory offence be prosecuted within one year of the alleged offence taking place. That cannot be done in the present case which is why the Crown seeks to prosecute under the common law.