Ex-world snooker champion Graeme Dott to face child sex abuse trial
The allegations span between 1993 and 1996 involving a girl, and 2006 to 2010 involving a boy, both in the Glasgow region.
A virtual hearing at the High Court in Glasgow on Thursday was told Dott, who was not present, denies the charges.
Defending, Euan Dow said: 'He pleads not guilty to two charges on the indictment.
'The position of the accused is that the allegations are fabricated and there is no truth in any of them.'
A trial date was set for August 17 next year at the same court and bail was continued.
Dott won the 2006 World Snooker Championship and was runner up in 2004 and 2010.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
6 hours ago
- Times
Former pastor convicted of abusing woman and children over 23 years
A former pastor with the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing) is behind bars after being convicted of the serial abuse of a woman and eight children over a 23-year period. The Rev James Haram, 51, was found guilty of 19 charges of physical and sexual abuse, with a judge branding his victims' ordeals as 'truly awful'. The crimes, which included the rape of the woman, took place between 1997 and 2020 at addresses in Glasgow, Dumbarton, West Dunbartonshire and South Ayrshire. Haram subjected the woman, whose identity is protected, to a campaign of abuse The High Court in Glasgow heard testimony detailing Haram's catalogue of abuse. The woman, whose identity is protected, was subjected to a campaign of psychological and physical torment. She was called derogatory names, and Haram would fly into rages, punching walls and throwing household items. The court was told he once threatened to hit her with a piano stool and even mowed over flowers she had grown. His controlling behaviour extended to tracking her movements and conversations. The violence escalated to the point where Haram grabbed and choked her, causing her 'whole body to go limp'. Jurors were also told of the pastor's manipulation as he badgered the woman into sex, using biblical references to force her to 'subject' herself to him. Haram conducted 'modesty checks' on young girls SPINDRIFT During his defence, Haram claimed all sexual encounters were consensual and that the woman was an 'incredibly convincing' liar who had used her 'many wonderful gifts' to 'turn against' him. However, he did admit to 'occasional flare-ups of aggression'. The court was told Haram conducted 'modesty checks' on young girls and violent beatings with a wooden spoon or a rod. John Macpherson, prosecuting, highlighted one girl's 'graphic account of some savagery' and being regularly beaten by Haram, an account which the pastor said was 'wholly fabricated'. In one incident, Haram allegedly flew into a rage while in a car with two children, threatening to deliberately crash and kill them all. He told the trial: 'They knew I did not mean it.' In a final act of defiance, Haram clutched a Bible as he was led to the cells. Judge Tom Hughes told Haram that the jury had heard deeply distressing evidence and that the 'extremely serious offences' would 'obviously carry a lengthy custodial sentence'. Sentencing has been deferred until September for reports, but Haram has been remanded in custody.
Daily Mail
10 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Facing jail, pastor found guilty of 19 charges of sexual and physical abuse against woman and children
A pastor is behind bars for the serial abuse of a woman and several children. Reverend James Haram put his traumatised victims through ordeals branded 'truly awful' by a judge. This included the 51-year-old raping the woman. The youngsters who were preyed upon were often struck with a wooden spoon or a rod. Haram - who had been with the Free Church of Scotland in Glasgow - was found guilty of a total of 19 charges of physical and sexual abuse. The crimes spanned between 1997 and 2020 at addresses in the city as well as Dumbarton, Dunbartonshire and in Ayrshire. Haram was remanded in custody at the High Court in Glasgow and will be sentenced in September. The woman regularly suffered at his hands. He called her names, punched walls, threw household items around in anger and threatened to hit her with a piano stool. He tracked where she went, checked who she was talking to and forced her to take part in religious activities. Haram once mowed over flowers the woman had taken time to grow. The pastor also suggested she should kill herself. The violence escalated with Haram grabbing and choking the woman. She recalled her 'whole body going limp'. Jurors heard the Haram would pester the woman into sex while making biblical references. She was told that she had to 'subject' herself to him. The victim recalled how she would sob with 'tears down her face'. But giving evidence, Haram claimed that 'every sexual encounter was consensual'. He claimed that the woman had 'many wonderful gifts', but that she had used them to 'turn against' him. He called her 'incredibly convincing'. But, the reverend, of Dumbarton, did accept there were 'occasional flare-ups of aggression'. The abuse of the children was said to include carrying out 'modesty checks' on girls to see what they were wearing. Prosecutor John Macpherson put to him that one girl gave 'a fairly graphic account of some savagery' of being 'regularly beaten'. He insisted this was 'wholly fabricated'. Jurors heard he flew into a rage while in a car with two children and claimed he would deliberately crash, killing them all. But, Haram told the trial: 'They knew I did not mean it.' Judge Tom Hughes deferred sentencing for reports. He told Haram: 'I think it is fair to say this has been a deeply distressing case for everyone involved. 'The jury has heard a different version of events from all the witnesses who gave evidence. 'It appears that (what happened) was truly awful - incidents of violence, aggression, all sorts of difficulties and the sexual offending which took place. 'During that period, you appeared to be living a life whereby you were acting in an official capacity as a man of the cloth. 'You have now been convicted of extremely serious offences which will obviously carry a lengthy custodial sentence.' Haram had been on bail, but was remanded meantime. He appeared to be clutching a Bible as he was led to the cells.
Daily Mail
14 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Housing migrants in protest-hit Epping hotel was a 'financial lifeline' for its owners and ending its use for asylum seekers would cause 'financial harm', High Court hears
The housing of asylum seekers at a controversial hotel in Epping was a 'financial lifeline' for its owners, a court has heard. The Bell Hotel has been targeted by spate of anti-immigration protests after one of its residents was charged with the sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl last month. Epping Forest District Council is now seeking an injunction from the High Court against its owners, Somani Hotels Ltd, to stop migrants being housed there. Barristers representing the company claimed at the High Court on Friday that the ending of the building's use an asylum hotel would cause 'financial harm'. Piers Riley-Smith told the court that migrants were a monetary 'lifeline' for the hotel, which was only one per cent full in August 2022, when it was open to paying customers. He added that an injunction would 'cause harm to the Home Office 's statutory duty to asylum seekers' and cause them 'hardship'. It comes after lawyers representing the council said housing asylum seekers at the hotel is becoming a 'very serious problem' which 'could not be much worse'. They claimed that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules as the site is no longer being used for its intended purpose as a hotel. The injunction sought by the authority, if granted, would require the company to stop housing asylum seekers at the hotel within 14 days. Opening the hearing in London, Philip Coppel KC, for the council, said: 'Epping Forest District Council comes to this court seeking an injunction because it has a very serious problem. 'It is a problem that is getting out of hand; it is a problem that is causing a great anxiety to those living in the district. 'The problem has arisen because of a breach of planning control by the defendant.' Mr Coppel also referenced the alleged sexual assault of a teenage girl by an asylum seeker who was placed in the hotel and said several schools were in the nearby area. He said: 'Having this sort of thing go on in such a concentration of schools with no measures in place to stop a repetition is not acceptable.' He continued: 'It really could not be much worse than this.' In written submissions for the hearing, Mr Coppel said there was a 'preponderance of factors overwhelmingly in favour of granting an injunction'. He said these included removing 'the catalyst for violent protests in public places'. The barrister added: 'Allowing the status quo to continue is wholly unacceptable, providing a feeding ground for unrest.' He also told the court that the case has been brought against the hotel owner because it is the landowner, and had previously applied for planning permission. Concluding his submissions, Mr Coppel told Mr Justice Eyre that if an injunction was not granted, 'Your Lordship will be telling the residents in Epping: 'You have just got to lump it''.' He added that the council is 'acting in a proportionate way, in the interests of its residents', and that 'enough is enough'. Piers Riley-Smith, representing Somani Hotels, told the court in written submissions that the injunction bid should be delayed to a later date. He added that the Home Office's contracted service provider, Corporate Travel Management (North) Limited (CTM), should be involved in the case. He continued that the alleged planning breach was 'not flagrant', and that it was 'entirely wrong' for the council to 'suggest the use has been hidden from them'. The barrister told the court that the hotel previously housed asylum seekers from May 2020 to March 2021, and from October 2022 to April 2024. He said that the council 'never instigated any formal enforcement proceedings against this use'. He also said that while the company did apply for planning permission for a 'temporary change of use' in February 2023, this was a 'pragmatic attempt to address the claimant's concerns, rather than an acceptance that such a use required planning permission'. This application was later withdrawn as it had not been determined by April 2024, the barrister said. Asylum seekers then began being placed in the Bell Hotel again in April 2025, with Mr Riley-Smith stating that a planning application was not made 'having taken advice from the Home Office'. Mr Riley-Smith also said that the company accepted that since the Southport riots in summer 2024, 'where the perpetrator was mistaken to be an asylum seeker', and the alleged sexual assault in Epping, 'there has been public concern about the use as evidenced by highly publicised violent and disorderly protests'. He continued: 'However, the court should bear in mind - as recognised by the claimant - that these have spread far beyond locals who might have a genuine concern about their area to a wider group with more strategic national and ideological aims, but that does not necessarily mean the concerns are well-founded. 'Fears as to an increase of crime associated with asylum seekers or a danger to schools are common, but that does not make them well-founded.' He added: 'It also sets a dangerous precedent that protests justify planning injunctions.' Police issued a dispersal order in Epping before the march on July 24, which included the town centre and transport hubs such as the Underground station The hearing before Mr Justice Eyre is due to conclude on Friday, with the judge saying it was 'unlikely' that a ruling would come this week. He said: 'I am not going to close my notebook and give a decision now. 'I am going to reflect on this, but we need a decision sooner rather than later.' The judge later said that he would give a ruling at 2pm on Tuesday. He also ordered that Somani Hotels Limited could not 'accept any new applications' from asylum seekers to stay at the site until he had ruled on whether to grant the temporary injunction.
