The Court of Appeal will decide next week whether to quash the convictions of former Bermuda Housing Corporation manager Glenn Brangman for a series of sex attacks on a teenage clerk.

The appeal panel of three judges heard arguments from Brangman’s lawyer Shade Subair yesterday that his four convictions for assaulting the 19-year-old male employee between January and June 2009 should be overturned.

Ms Subair said Magistrate Khamisi Tokunbo, who convicted Brangman in February 2012 after a lengthy Magistrates’ Court trial, failed to take into account inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony.

“My case is that the learned magistrate could not reasonably have concluded that there were not inconsistencies,” she said.

Ms Subair said the complainant, who is now 24 and cannot be named for legal reasons, portrayed himself as a homeless person who did not initially dare complain about the sexual assaults by his boss for fear of losing his job and BHC accommodation.

But she said under cross-examination it emerged that he had other places to stay, including at his grandmother’s and girlfriend’s, and had previously left another job on good terms, so had other employment options.

The lawyer said it was “incredible” to accept that victim Mr X would have endured ten separate sexual assaults, as he alleged, simply in order to keep his job and a roof over his head.

She also questioned why the clerk agreed to accompany his boss to Clear View Guest House in Hamilton Parish on June 11, if he had previously been assaulted by him.

That submission prompted the appeal panel to ask what choice the young man had, since he was following orders from his superior.

Brangman, 61, was visiting Clear View to prepare rooms for the four Uighurs from Guantánamo Bay, whom he had been tasked with helping settle on the Island.

He was found by Mr Tokunbo to have pushed Mr X onto a bed at the guest house before attacking him.

Ms Subair claimed the magistrate failed to give enough weight to character evidence, pointing out that her client was a man of previous good character while his accuser was a petty criminal who was on probation when the offences took place.

“This case comes down to one person’s word against the other,” Ms Subair said.

But Judge Anthony Evans suggested the magistrate had considered the character and achievements of Brangman in reaching his verdict — but concluded that neither the defendant or his witnesses “had given any good reason to doubt the evidence” of the victim.

After hearing her submissions the panel briefly rose before Appeal Court president Edward Zacca told the court they would not call on the Crown to make submissions.

He said the panel’s decision would be given next week and he extended Brangman’s bail in the meantime.

The Royal Gazette revealed last year that similar allegations were made against Brangman by 13 male soldiers between 1989 and 2002, while he was an officer in the Bermuda Regiment, but none were ever proven.