THE alleged victim of sexual abuse by a Catholic priest with a “foot fetish” has told the Royal Court he discovered a bag of children’s socks in the priest’s house.
Piotr Antoni Glas (61) pleaded with the complainant to let him explain himself and claimed he collected the socks from the changing rooms of a secondary school in Southampton where he worked as a priest before coming to Jersey, the court was told on Tuesday.
And the court heard the priest told the complainant if he admitted his offending, “I would be out of the priesthood the next day with a massive scandal”.
Mr Glas denies eight counts of committing acts of gross indecency and two counts of indecent assault against a child.
The complainant previously described how Mr Glas would lie with his face against the alleged victim’s feet, and the complainant would hear what sounded like a man masturbating.
The priest would freeze when the child looked at him, the court heard.
Mr Glas, known as Peter when his Polish name is Anglicised, is also accused of wrestling the child until his head was near his erect penis, and of kissing the child twice on the mouth.
Crown Advocate Carla Carvalho, prosecuting, described the alleged offences as “repeated” abuse committed by a parish priest on a child over 20 years ago, saying Mr Glas used his position to gain the complainant and their family’s trust “in order to get [the child] alone”.
The years of grooming included giving the family gifts as well as occasions where the priest and the child slept in the same bed, the court heard.
She said: “When he was alone with [the child] he would fulfil what the prosecution says is his particular sexual interest… a sexual fetish that you will hear involved feet.
“It is a sexual interest in feet that you will hear goes back years.”
Addressing jurors on Tuesday, the alleged victim said he found a bag of children’s socks at Mr Glas’s house.
The complainant said he was left “disgusted” for reasons he could not understand because he was still a child.
“Something in my gut told me that there was something untoward about it,” he said.
He described Mr Glas “pleading” with him to let him explain himself.
The complainant said: “He assured me that they were socks from his time in Southampton from a local secondary school… from the changing rooms that he had collected while he was working as a priest there.”
Advocate Carvalho asked: “Did he tell you why he collected the socks?”
The alleged victim replied: “He said he had a problem with feet and that that was something he’s struggled with for a long time.”
He explained that the priest had taken him to throw the bag of socks away, but that the child later returned to retrieve it as evidence.
“I never wanted it to be my word against his if I ever was to confront him,” the complainant said. “I knew that he would have a lot more influence than I did.”
He said he had mentioned his concerns to his parents at the time, but he was “quickly dismissed”. Meanwhile, the priest told him that he had been to confession, which he claimed had solved the issue. But the abuse continued, the court heard.
The alleged victim only came to terms with what had happened to him years later.
In court, he described a “crisis of conscience” which led him to start disclosing the abuse – first to his father, and later to authorities.
“I needed to start taking some steps towards making sure that the defendant was no longer a threat to minors,” he said.
He described how he had feared, both as a child and later on, that he would have no evidence and that the defendant would receive more support, due to his prominence as a self-proclaimed exorcist.
Advocate Carvalho said the complainant eventually confronted Mr Glas, who told him his heart was “broken” but tried to discourage him from reporting the abuse to church authorities, saying he still wanted to be buried as a priest.
Jurors listened to two calls the complainant made, in which he quizzed the priest about the bag of socks as well as the other incidents.
The priest explained that he had been beaten and kicked at the age of eight, which had provoked the foot fetish.
But he resisted encouragements from the alleged victim to seek professional help or speak to church authorities.
The complainant told Mr Glas: “God does know. God does love you. But the same father who called you into existence, he also wants you to find healing.
“My concern is that you have never dealt with this and you have never actually talked to someone.”
During the second call, Mr Glas admitted: “I scandalised you, I hurt you, I damaged you…
“I understand how much you are suffering.”
He added: “I ruined you. That’s the worst part, I ruined you.”
The complainant told him that even though he accepted his apology and forgave him, he said he should not be a priest where he would have access to children.
“Please have mercy on me. I will step down from priesthood. I just don’t want an ordeal,” the priest said.
The complainant responded: “I just don’t want any other young person to experience what I experienced. That’s the bottom line.”
The priest said that there had been no-one else apart from the complainant and that he wanted to “be buried as a priest, not as a layperson”.
“I’m in your hands,” he added.
“If I say this, I would be out of priesthood the next day with a massive scandal,” Mr Glas said.
He said that he could stop being a priest when his term at his parish was up later that year, and that he would become “a hermit” then.
The jury trial is scheduled to continue until the middle of next week.
Deputy Bailiff, Robert MacRae, is presiding.