A blind Tory peer accused of groping a masseuse’s bottom told a court today the woman was ‘unconcerned’ as his hands moved ‘towards her bum’.
Lord Christopher Holmes of Richmond MBE, 48, allegedly pointed to his crotch and asked if the woman did ‘extras’ at a five star hotel’s spa on March 7 last year.
Lord Holmes, who is visually impaired and a life peer in the House of Lords, is the UK’s most successful Paralympic swimmer, with 9 golds, five silvers, and one bronze.
Following his retirement from professional swimming, he was elevated to the House of Lords in 2015.
The peer denies sexually assaulting the masseuse and has told jurors at Southwark Crown Court he asks to touch people with consent ‘to get a sense’ of them.
Lord Christopher Holmes (right), 48, allegedly pointed to his crotch and asked if the woman did ‘extras’ at a five star hotel’s spa on March 7 last year. Left: Lord Holmes with his guide dog and a woman believed to be his wife Stephanie outside Southwark Crown Court
Cross examining the peer, prosecutor Linda Strudwick said: ‘You asked her to put your hands on her.’
Lord Holmes replied: ‘I said, ”Is it okay to touch you to see what you look like”. I thought by asking slowly and putting my hands up she understood.’
Ms Strudwick continued: ‘She thought you wanted to touch her face. You didn’t tell her you wanted to touch her face, her shoulders, down her back towards her bum.’
Lord Holmes said: ‘I thought she understood after she said yes in an unconcerned manner.
‘In hindsight, I could have explained more. But to make sure she was okay I said, ”Is this okay?” and again she said ”yes” in an unconcerned manner.’
The prosecutor said there was no reference to him asking the masseuse if she was ‘okay’ after he ran his fingers towards her bottom in his police statement.
Lord Holmes said: ‘I am absolutely clear on oath that I said ”is that okay?” and she said ”yes” in an unconcerned way.’
Ms Strudwick said: ‘You didn’t get any consent to touch her back beginning for the lower end of the back. She did not give you permission to touch her body. ‘
Lord Holmes insisted: ‘When my hands were somewhere close to her back I said ”are you okay?” I was seeking to try and bridge that gap of understanding.
‘In hindsight, I would have done more but had she felt uncomfortable at any point she simply could have moved 10 centimetres away from me and I wouldn’t have known where she was.’
Ms Strudwick told the court the woman was trapped in the limited space between bed and wall and could not have moved after he ‘squeezed her between his legs’.
The peer replied: ‘No. I was lying flat on the bed, I sat up with my legs straight on the bed. I never moved my legs from the bed, I couldn’t have got them out from the towel.
‘There wouldn’t have been room for me to get them around in front of the complainant without pushing her back or indeed by taking my right leg and somehow swinging it over her head, indeed it didn’t happen.’
The prosecutor added: ‘Why did you think she was embarrassed and upset?’ Lord Holmes replied: ‘She only seemed slightly upset. I immediately apologised.’
He told the court he felt ‘vulnerable’ after he accidentally broke the disposable underwear he had been provided because he could not work out which way they went on.
Lord Holmes said: ‘I felt uncomfortable while I was lying on my front. When I turned on my back I felt vulnerable because there was only a towel between me and the complainant.
‘I felt vulnerable, and if in an instance, if I had had a glance that would have gone. Nothing in the massage suggested any trust.’
He said he asked to touch the complainant because he needed to feel secure. He added: ‘I needed something, that atavistic need that we all have to feel secure.’
Ms Strudwick said: ‘Don’t you think that if you had mentioned it at the beginning, that you wanted to touch in order to see your therapist it might have helped and prevented the confusion of the therapist?’
Holmes (centre with his meddles), who is a life peer in the House of Lords, is Britain’s most successful Paralympic swimmer, with a total of nine golds, five silvers and one bronze
Lord Holmes replied: ‘At that stage, I wouldn’t have had the need to.’ He said he felt uneasy when he was greeted by staff and they did not accommodate his disability.
He said: ‘If that had happened, I would have been guided down by the complainant. I would have asked if I could hold her arm, I would have felt safer. We would have made conversation.’
Jurors heard the masseuse did not introduce herself and asked if his dog was friendly in a ‘slightly aggressive, maybe accusatory tone’ before he reassured her it was a guide dog.
Lord Holmes told jurors he had asked her to massage his left glute as it was tight from exercise after he had removed his clothes, but she had declined.
He said: ‘Because at that stage I would have been fully clothed I could have pointed at my glute and the experience would have been a lot different for both of us.’
He said the masseuse’s account of him ‘flicking’ the towel and exposing his buttocks ‘absolutely did not happen’.
The prosecutor said the peer had not mentioned he felt ‘vulnerable’ in his prepared statement to police but he said it was difficult to talk about his disability.
He said: ‘It’s very difficult to talk about blindness. I’ve been rejected from hotels, supermarkets, from pubs’.
The prosecutor said: ‘I’m going to suggest that there are a number of differences in the prepared statement when compared to the evidence you have given.’
Lord Holmes replied: ‘This pre-prepared statement was prepared by my legal advisors, I had one telephone call to go through it.’
Holmes, joined in the dock by his assistance dog, black Labrador, Nancy, denied one charge of sexual assault at London’s Southwark Crown Court (file photo)
He said the tone was ‘not correct’ but he had ‘no concern that there were any matters that were incorrect.’ He said: ‘I would have liked it to be clearer and fuller.
‘Given more detail, but at the stage, it was prepared as I understood it was an initial statement.’
Ms Strudwick suggested the peer’s statement was full of ‘inconsistencies and discrepancies’ and claimed he always planned for a ‘sexual element’ in his deep-tissue manage treatment.
She said: ‘It is the prosecution case that you used hotel spas and hotel therapists for the purpose of achieving sexual relief, getting them to do extras.’
Lord Holmes replied: ‘That’s completely untrue.’
An avid athlete, Lord Holmes had continued swimming after losing his sight, training with a sighted team preparing for the Olympics.
He earlier told the court his wife of 17 years Stephanie has been ‘incredibly supportive’ of him since the allegation was made.
The trial continues.