A distraught mother brought her ex-boyfriend to Magistrates' Court last week for allegedly invading the privacy of her teenage daughter.

Christine Patricia Renee Smith of Slip Road, St. George's, said her former boyfriend, Melvin Boen of St. George's, peeped through her bathroom window at her daughter, Garina Tucker, sometime last year between February and March.

Crown counsel Shakira Dill asked Ms Smith to tell the court how Boen allegedly invaded the privacy of her 15-year-old daughter. Ms Smith said Boen had gone out to the car to get a bucket from the trunk. She said her daughter had gone to the bathroom to get a wash cloth on the morning of the alleged incident. In her testimony she told Magistrate Ed King that she went to the bathroom to tell her daughter to hurry up when she saw the silhouette of Boen looking through the bathroom window. "The window was open a bit and I saw Melvin's grey work shirt and his silhouette ? it was 6:45 ? there was enough light to see," she said.

Ms Smith told the court that she swore as soon as she saw him. "I said... I've caught you."

She said the defendant ducked when he realised she had seen him.

Ms Smith said she then ran to her bedroom window and looked out the window to see if Boen was near the car. She said at that time he was just taking the bucket out of the trunk and walked back to the house where she confronted him.

"When he returned to the house he came through the kitchen door asking who we were talking about," she said. "I was cursing, I said... you dirty pervert, you need to get out of my house."

An emotional Ms Smith said her relationship with Boen was sweet in the beginning but he then became "nasty, mean, controlling and hot tempered".

Defence Attorney Leo Mills asked Ms Smith: "When he later became all these things, did you display a sweet disposition?"

"To the public yes, to him no," she replied.

The court was told that Boen occasionally contributed to household expenses and that once "in a blue moon" he would pay the rent. Mr. Mills said the line of questioning was intended to establish that Boen was not along for the ride.

Mr. Mills cross examined Ms Smith about the window blinds in her bathroom and if they were open far enough for her to see the defendant. "I would suggest to you that you could not have a clear view of the person outside the window," he said.

Ms Smith said she could see the outline of Boen's face but not the ears, eyes, nose and lips. "What else did you not see?" asked Mr. King. "I saw..." said Ms Smith.

"No, I didn't ask what you saw, I want to know what you didn't see," said Mr. King.

When Ms Smith paused Mr. King said: "If you can show me this then you can tell me."

"I saw his head but not his eyes, lips, nose and ears," she said.

"If you did not see those things used to visually identify a person how can you say that you saw Melvin?" questioned Mr. King.

Mr. King then tried to establish if the blinds were pointing upwards or downwards.

When asked to give further description of what she saw that morning Ms Smith said she could see the defendant's Air Care logo on his shirt and the silhouette of his body.

When Garina Tucker, 15, took the stand, Mr. King asked if she knew why she was in court. "He invaded my privacy," she said. "He looked at me when I was in the bathroom."

Tucker told the court she was wearing her housecoat, bra and underwear when she was in the bathroom and she knew the defendant had been looking at her because she spotted his hand next to the window pane with a ring on his finger that she recognised.

When Mr. Mills cross examined Ms Tucker he asked her if Boen said anything to her during the time of the alleged incident to which Ms Tucker responded no.

She said before taking off her house coat to wash at the sink she saw the person's hand at the window. "Were you able to see the face of the person?" asked Mr. Mills.

"No," she said. "I just saw his hand."

Ms Tucker said the defendant's face was out of sight but he was leaning to the side on the wall outside the bathroom.

It took some time for the court to establish why Ms Tucker had told the court that her bathroom window was broken and on the previous night she had stayed inside the bath until her mother came home because she was afraid Boen would look at her through the window.

Mr. King asked how this incident was related to the alleged incident which occurred in the morning.

"Why did you tell the court about not getting out of the bathtub on the night before the incident if you had not seen him looking at you?" asked Mr. King.

"I thought he was, I felt afraid," said Tucker.

Mr. King said her testimony made it seem like more happened than what did and that perhaps the witness was referring to another incident. He then pointed out to the court that Boen did not need to take the stand because the burden of proof rested on the prosecution.

"We must never lose sight of the fact that the law gives the defendant the right not to say anything."

Mr. Mills made a no case submission telling the court that "we say the Crown has not met its burden of proof in this case to the extent that the court be satisfied."

Mr. King set a no-case ruling for today.

Mr. Mills requested bail for his client saying there is no risk that Boen would not appear before the court. He said Boen should not be remanded of custody because he had familial obligations to fulfil. Mr. King set bail at $1,000 and told the court there was no reason why the defendant should be deprived of his liberties.