A girl who says Coronation Street star Michael Le Vell raped her “on a regular basis”, faced tough cross examination from the television star’s defence today, but maintained that her allegations against the television actor were true.
48-year-old Le Vell, who plays the mechanic Kevin Webster in the ITV soap, is being tried for 12 charges at the Manchester Crown Court, including five counts of rape and three counts of indecent assault.
The female witness, who is giving evidence from behind a screen and cannot be identified for legal reason, faced fierce questioning this morning from Le Vell’s defence, who questioned apparent discrepancies in the girl’s story, and accused her of lying to the court.
Alasdair Williamson, who is defending Le Vell, said that the witness had been influenced by attending an “inspirational self- help” conference where she heard a motivational speech from a woman who had been raped as a child but had then gone on to become a successful model.
Mr Williamson said: "Is that what some of this is about? You heard this lady talking about how she was raped when she was very young and how she went on and became a model? You want to become an actress or a dancer, is that right?"
The witness replied: "I wanted to, I don't any more."
The defence then said that in police interviews the witness had claimed to remember the exact times when alleged rapes took place – but that she had also claimed two of the rapes happened at exactly the same time.
Mr Williamson suggested to the girl that such details had
been fabricated to convince the police of Le Vell’s guilt. Further questions
from Eleanor Laws QC then drew the court’s attention to the fact that the
witness had expanded her allegations after the Crown Prosecution Service
dropped the case in December 2011. Ms Laws said the witness waited until March
2012 to offer information about how she had allegedly been raped orally, having
not mentioned such details in the previous investigation.
And the witness only mentioned a further alleged rape in 2013 after an "additional memory", the court then heard.
The witness, breaking down in tears in the witness box, then told the jury: "I had a lot more flashbacks. I was very confused. Because what he did to me was so wrong. I was so young."
The case continues.Reuse content