Roache cleared of one sex assault allegation

The jury in his rape and indecent assault trial at Preston Crown Court was directed by the judge to return a not guilty verdict on the single count of indecent assault, dating back to 1965.

The allegation was one of two made by a woman who said she was aged 14 when Roache, who plays Ken Barlow in the ITV soap, twice made her perform a sexual act on him.

Giving evidence, the complainant said the actor first struck in the gents’ toilets at Granada Studios in Manchester in the summer of 1965.

Jurors were then shown a letter and signed photograph that Roache had sent to her after that alleged incident in which he asked to her write back to him when she returned to school.

The woman claimed later that same year she was picked up by the actor from the studios in his Rolls-Royce and they had a conversation of a sexual nature.

She said she thought that she had also been indecently assaulted in his car but she had “no actual memory” of the episode.

Judge Mr Justice Holroyde, said: “In relation to that episode the witness was not giving evidence that it did happen, she was giving evidence that she was thinking it did happen and that is not a sufficient evidential basis for the conviction of an offence.”

Roache, 81, of Wilmslow, Cheshire, remains on trial over two counts of rape and four counts of indecent assault involving five complainants who were aged 16 and under on dates between 1965 and 1971.

He was charged last May with two counts of rape on one alleged victim, with the publicity that followed leading to the other complainants coming forward. He denies all the charges.

Anne Whyte QC told the jury: “We do not invite you to convict on any allegation where the witness has no recollection. So we do not proceed against Mr Roache in relation to count two.”

The allegation on count two was that Roache assaulted a female person aged 14 between June and September 1965.

Mr Justice Holroyde told the eight female and four male jurors: “Each charge is a separate allegation which requires your separate consideration and separate verdict.”

He said it was “a matter of law” the jury “could not and must not” convict on the count concerned.

The trial continues today.