eight-year-old girl in March last year, yesterday had his case adjourned until November 18.

The man, who lives on Middle Road, denies the offence that allegedly occurred on March 16 around five o'clock in the afternoon.

Det. Con. Lorna Richardson told Supreme Court she was off-duty, sitting in her car in the Fort Hamilton car park when she noticed a man she recognised walking across the car park.

"He was gesturing for someone to follow him and a short while afterwards a young Portuguese girl followed him,'' she said.

"They stopped behind a clump of trees talking. About five minutes later, he walked south on Fort Hamilton Drive and again gestured for the girl to follow and she did.

"Not long afterwards the girl came (back) alone and walked around the car park entrance. I saw an older woman come out of Fort Hamilton Drive. Once the older woman was out of sight, the girl went back to where she left the man.'' Det. Con. Richardson said she saw the man and the girl come back up the drive and again went into the clump of trees some 15 to 20 feet in front of her.

"I saw the girl's skirt was up to her waist and I could see her underpants, I couldn't see what caused her dress to go up but I could see the man looking in that direction.

"The little girl pushed her dress down and walked up towards the Fort and he followed her.

"I approached the girl who seemed upset though she tried hard not to let it show. I told her to go home.'' Defence lawyer Mr. Archie Warner told the court that there was no evidence that his client had done anything against the law.

He said the law only applied if there was evidence that his client intentionally accosted, made gestures or used any object aimed to offend the girl. Mr. Warner said there was no evidence to suggest that his client did any of those things with this girl.

"This section (of the law) relates to cases of criminal harassment,'' he said. "There is no evidence that he uttered any word or made any gesture or used any object to commit an indecent act.

"There is no evidence that he pulled up her skirt or touched her in any way.

They were out in the open where they could be seen and they walked around harmoniously together. There is absolutely no evidence to satisfy the vital elements of the law,'' he said.

But Sgt. Peter Giles, prosecuting, told the court that the legislation was intended to prevent individuals from invading the privacy of females.

"This law was designed to prevent assaults,'' he argued. "It deals specifically with the period before the assault.'' Sgt. Giles described the eight-year-old as a credible witness who was severely frightened by the event.

"He held her hand and led her about against her will. She told the court in her statement that she did not want to go. This is accosting the little girl.

She even explained how bad she felt.

"The Policewoman who saw the acts saw that the girl's dress was up and the accused was looking at her underwear. One can draw only one conclusion from that. An indecent act was taking place.''