FORMER snooker champion Graeme Dott began allegedly abusing a young boy shortly after winning the world title, a court has heard.
The then youngster told jurors Dott molested him in the shower, gave him a £50 note as part of a "reward strategy" and groped him while playing online poker during "opportunistic" incidents.
The witness – now in his 20s – made the claims at the High Court in Glasgow on Thursday.
Dott, 49, is on trial where he denies two charges of lewd and libidinous behaviour towards the then boy and a girl spanning between 1993 and 2010.
The man today/yesterday alleged he was abused at a house in South Lanarkshire after Dott won the world snooker championship in May 2006.
The witness said he was around eight at the time.
He first spoke about a "shower incident" in which he claimed Dott "inappropriately touched" him.
The man: "I was so naive and innocent I did not know what was happening."
He alleged Dott was "very, very cautious" about getting wet himself so would take some of his clothes off.
The ex-champion was also said to have "complimented" the then child on his body.
The witness alleged Dott would ensure he "complied" and that "raising his voice" put "fear and alarm" into him.
He also claimed Dott got "sexual gratification" and described what happened as "more opportunistic".
Asked by prosecutor Lindsey Dalziel how often such incidents occurred, the man claimed "six, maybe seven times".
The witness alleged Dott would be "nice" and give him things.
These included Thai chilli crisps and Irn Bru, which he can now no longer eat or drink to this day.
The man also said Dott once gave him a £50 note after an alleged incident.
The then child went to a local store and the shopkeeper questioned why he had such an amount of money.
The witness' parents were told about it – before it was alleged Dott later instead accused the boy of having "stolen" the £50.
The man told jurors the lead-up to being given the money was "sexually motivated" and that it was a "reward strategy" for what had allegedly gone on.
He also said Dott was inappropriate with him in a room while he played online poker games.
The witness told Miss Dalziel it happened there at least three times, possibly up to seven occasions.
Other alleged incidents were said to have occurred in a car after he parked up in an area "out of the public eye". This was said to have happened approximately five times.
Asked about any further recollections, the witness stated anything related to Dove soap gives him PTSD "flashbacks" as Dott allegedly used it for a skin condition.
The alleged abuse was said to have stopped in 2010.
Cross-examining the man, Euan Dow, defending, put to him: "Mr Dott does not accept any of the incidents of alleged abuse that you describe in your evidence."
He replied: "Yes, I am aware of that."
Among his questions, Mr Dow challenged the witness about the £50 note testimony.
The advocate stated if the then child had been accused of stealing then he could have given the "real reason" how he had it, if true.
The witness replied he "could have", but said his age at the time was a factor.
Dott later took to the witness box himself following the end of the prosecution evidence. Mr Dow initially questioned him on the accusations made by the then girl earlier in the trial. She had claimed there was sexual contact when she was a child and that Dott also exposed himself. Mr Dow: “She has described a number of occasions you behaved inappropriately to her.” Dott: “Absolutely no way, on any occasion.” He further described accusations as “disgusting”. Dott said he first became aware of allegations involving the girl in 2001 when police contacted him. It resulted in publicity, but no charges. Dott – who the court heard is separated from his wife Elaine – was then probed about claims made by the then boy. Dott said he was never alone with him. Mr Dow: “At any stage, during the period of the libel on either charge, did you behave inappropriately to either of them?” He replied: “I have never acted inappropriately with anyone.” Under cross-examination, Dott refuted a suggestion by prosecutor Miss Dalziel that he had been “sexually attracted” to the girl. The advocate depute: “It escalated to touching?” Dott: “Nonsense.” Miss Dalziel: “You gave her instructions about what to do and she complied.” He said: “Lies.” Miss Dalziel later concluded: “You abused vulnerable children for your own sexual gratification, Mr Dott. You would deny that?” Dott: “100%.”
