A convicted paedophile walked free from Supreme Court yesterday after a jury cleared him of sexually assaulting a six-year-old boy.

But his lawyer launched a scathing attack on the Police investigation into the 2001 incident, claiming they could have made the job of defending the 27-year-old Warwick man "a lot more difficult".

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons but has a history of sexually assaulting young men, was found not guilty by a ten to two majority of breaking and entering into a Southampton home on September 16, 2001 and touching the penis and buttocks of a six-year-old asleep in his bed.

The Royal Gazette can now reveal the man also stood trial last year for an attempted sexual assault on a teenage boy on the same morning as this incident - that case was thrown out but he did admit to trespassing and was jailed for 12 months.

The accused was released from a four-year prison sentence for buggery in the late 1990s. He had been convicted of sexually assaulting a minor, having unlawful carnal knowledge and also for unlawfully detaining a minor.

Yesterday, the jury took just over an hour to reach their verdict at the end of the five-day trial during which defence counsel Larry Mussenden was highly critical of the Police investigation throughout.

The family of the six-year-old boy were too distraught to speak to The Royal Gazette after the verdict, which was greeted with moans of disbelief in Supreme Court One yesterday, but they are understood to be furious with the Police and disbelieving of Bermuda's justice system.

The court had heard the main evidence linking the accused with the crime scene was the discovery of the key to his bike in the doorway of the house where the alleged assault took place with the bike found parked nearby.

But the man claimed his bike had been stolen hours before while he slept by the roadside after a night out drinking, although he admitted he never contacted Police to report the missing bike.

He was also positively identified by a neighbour as being in the area, the court heard.

The court was told that Police had gathered no forensic evidence for the case, something which Mr. Mussenden criticised both during cross examination of officers and in his closing speech.

After the trial, the former Police officer and Crown counsel told The Royal Gazette: "I am absolutely astounded by the lack of investigation into this matter.

"You expect to have a full investigation with detailed inquiries on every possible suspect, not just the first person they find. I think that a thorough examination of the scene could have assisted the prosecution.

"When Police attend a crime they should keep in mind that it will end up in court in the future and should be aware of the standards of proof required. The job of defending this man should have been a lot more difficult."

He then added: "My client is satisfied that this matter is behind him. We respect the decision of the jury."

During the trial, the court had heard that an intruder had broken into a house in Southampton and went upstairs to the bedroom where a six-year-old boy was sleeping alongside his mother.

The court heard from the youngster, now eight-years-old, who said a man had twice touched his penis and his buttocks over his underwear, causing him to scream.

This woke his mother who told the court she then saw a man crouching over her son. The man then fled leaving behind a bike key which started a vehicle parked nearby.

The accused was identified by a neighbour in the vicinity shortly afterwards, although he told the court he was there looking for his stolen bike.