A FORMER restaurant manager accused of the sexual abuse of five girls in the 1980s and 1990s has called them “professional liars” who were “desperate for money”.
Ramsey Ramsey, 79, is accused of 37 counts of sexual abuse against five girls under 16 in the 1980s and 1990s, including 16 counts of rape. He denies any wrongdoing.
Yesterday, on day eight of his trial at Chester Crown Court, Ramsey, former long-serving manager of the Bombay Palace restaurant in Upper Northgate Street, Chester, continued his evidence to the jury.
He told the court the five women accusing him had been driven by greed.
He said: “They are all liars, professional liars, motivated by money.”
John Wyn Williams, prosecuting, then asked Ramsey whether the emotion seen on the stand by all of the alleged victims was fake.
Ramsey replied: “It was an act. For money. They did not want to get me into trouble. They wanted to get money. They are desperate for money.”
Ramsey, of Grange Road, Newton, also claimed the investigating officer in the case, DC Simon Ledger, had persuaded three of the women to give evidence against him and was trying to “humiliate” him.
He said: “He forced the girls. He went to see them hundreds of times. He forced them all. He was going to see them every day, forcing them to make statements.
“He tried to humiliate me all the time. He is not human.”
Earlier in the trial, the jury heard two of the women had contacted police with allegations about Ramsey and police had contacted a number of other women when items relating to them were found in Ramsey’s home.
Mr Williams took Ramsey through each of the individuals’ allegations against him. Ramsey replied “never, never, never” each time he was asked if he had touched any of the women sexually.
Ramsey was also asked about six photographs found in his house of two teenage girls who were semi-naked or nude.
One of the complainants in the case identified herself in five of the pictures and said she was 14 when they were taken. The girl in other the picture remained unidentified, the court heard.
When asked about why Ramsey had the pictures in his home in Chester, Ramsey said he had not taken the photos and did not know they were in his house.
Questioned about the other picture of the unidentified girl, Ramsey said it was sent with a letter to a student who was in the bedsit. He did not know it was in his flat.
Mr Williams also asked Ramsey about a number of letters seized by police in his other home in Southport.
The letters, written by two of the alleged victims make references to their schoolteachers and performing sexual acts on and having sex with Ramsey.
Ramsey said he had not read the letters at the time when they were sent because he “had no interest in them” and could not read the handwriting.
Mr Williams read out a number extracts to the court including “we have decided to be good little girls and do anything you want” and “whatever you do to the one you can do to the other one”.
Mr Williams suggested to Ramsey that these were clear sexual references. Ramsey replied: “I don’t think so.”
Mr Williams questioned Ramsey’s claim that he has been unable to get an erection since 1974 when he broke his back after falling through a glass roof at work.
Mr Williams said the medical evidence given by Dr Geoffrey Hedley suggested Ramsey was able to perform sexually. Ramsey refuted the claim and said he had tried a number of treatments because he had wanted to remarry after the death of his second wife in 1975.
Mr Williams also asked him about his lifestyle before he retired. He asked Ramsey whether he would give people gifts and money.
Ramsey said: “Yes, all of the time. I am very generous. Money doesn’t mean anything to me.
“I had half a million and I have never let anyone buy me a drink. I would buy food for the tramps and go and sit with them for hours.”
He said he gave people money to buy things if they asked him and bought cigarettes for people. When asked if he was a lonely man, Ramsey replied: “I lived alone all my life but I have a lot of friends, maybe 10,000 in Chester.”
Ramsey denied Mr Williams’ suggestion that because of the gifts and money he gave to these girls he was able to exert “control over them” and used them for his own sexual pleasure.
The defence is expected to close its case today to be followed by closing speeches by both prosecution and defence barristers.