Magistrate William Francis last night defended the way he allowed a defence lawyer to cross-examine an eight-year-old boy who accused a male teacher of molesting him.

It follows criticism from Sheelagh Cooper of the Coalition for the Protection of Children that defence lawyer Larry Mussenden ?aggressively? cross-examined the boy for two days.

And she said the child, who cannot be named for legal reasons, should have been allowed to give evidence that the teacher touched his penis from behind a screen.

But Mr. Francis, who threw out the case because the evidence was inconsistent, said last night the defence must have the right to cross-examine an accuser, particularly in serious cases such as these.

And he said that he suggested the boy give evidence behind a screen, but neither Mr. Mussenden nor Crown Counsel Anthony Blackman took up the suggestion.

Mr. Francis added that some people would like the burden of evidence in cases involving children to switch so that accused adults had to prove their innocence ? which flew in the face of the constitution.

?A person who gives evidence from the witness stand, they should be cross-examined,? he said. ?To not allow cross-examination would be to violate the system entirely. The defence should put their case to them.

?They were saying the class in question didn?t happen and the incident didn?t take place and also they had to challenge the evidence because there were so many differences between the statement the boy made to the Police and statement he made from the witness stand.

?There are no rules that say a child that makes an allegation, particularly a serious allegation, should have their evidence tested in any way differently from an adult or an older child.

?I understand that in some places you can testify by video, but that would need legislation here to do that.

?I am not hurling any accusations at Sheelagh Cooper, but sometimes hearing people criticise the system, they almost want to back into a system where if a child makes an allegation, we must assume that what he says is true and almost degenerate into a system where the accused has to prove his innocence rather than be presumed innocent ? which goes against the constitution.?

The court was cleared, except for the lawyers, the magistrate and the press, when the boy gave his evidence. Mr. Francis added: ?If he (Mr. Blackman) had asked for a screen I would gladly have given him a screen. In fact, I suggested the screen, but he didn?t take it up.?

Mrs. Cooper told this week: ?Aggressive cross-examination of children is unfair, inhumane, unnecessary, and more than likely to yield distortion than exact truth.?

The Coalition has filed a complaint against the headmistress of the boy?s school, which cannot be named for legal reasons, alleging she asked the child?s parents not to take the complaint to the Police.