A FURNITURE dealer accused of perverting the course of justice has claimed he was acting in a “state of shock” when he visited the mother of a child who had alleged historical abuse.
David Richard Hick (70) is accused of visiting the mother of a child who had accused Father Piotr Glas, a former Catholic priest in Jersey, of historical abuse. Fr Glas was convicted of the charges but has since successfully appealed and will be retried.
It is alleged that Mr Hick tried to influence the family to stop the investigation during two visits to the family home.
Mr Hick denies one charge of perverting the course of justice.
Appearing in front of two Royal Court jurats yesterday, Mr Hick said he had visited the child’s mother – but that he had done so in a moment of shock.
Mr Hick and Fr Glas became “very good friends” having met in the early 2000s, Mr Hick said.
“He had a very deep faith, he was incredibly spiritual,” Mr Hick said. “He did wonderful things for the whole western Catholic community.”
Mr Hick described himself as having a “very strong faith”. He was born into a Catholic family and had gone to a Catholic boarding school, where he went to church several times a week.
Fr Glas supported Mr Hick during a 16-year battle with his business’s bank, the court heard.
Together, they had “very special times, very happy times”, Mr Hick said, adding that the priest was “instrumental to [his] faith”.
Fr Glas had moved to England and the two were in less regular contact by the time the priest was under investigation.
Fr Glas told Mr Hick on the phone about the allegation – a call where Mr Hick described him as “distressed”. “I couldn’t believe it,” Mr Hick said.
He visited the mother that same morning, leaving his house minutes after the phone call ended.
Mr Hick said he told her: “I can’t believe this is happening” and cited “all the good times [they] had together”. He told her that “this must stop” and that “God did not want this”.
He said he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and added: “I had been very sick for a long time. My PTSD made me very vulnerable to shock.”
Asked what he meant by “this has to stop”, Mr Hick said: “What I meant by that was that the memories mustn’t be shattered. You can’t allow for memories and the happy times to be shattered. So I wanted to disbelieve what was going on, because obviously I was in shock.
“I was in a state of total disbelief – a state of severe sadness.”
He added that with hindsight, “clearly it was obviously inappropriate to go and I am saddened by the fact that I upset her”.
Crown Advocate Carla Carvalho, prosecuting, suggested Mr Hick made a “conscious decision” to drive to the woman’s house.
Mr Hick replied: “I wouldn’t describe it as a conscious decision. I was in a state of shock and I don’t understand to this day what propelled me to go.”
He denied asking her to retract her statement.
The second visit, two days later, was only because Mr Hick had misplaced the woman’s phone number and wanted to get it again, he said.
The shock he had experienced took him another 12 months to process, as he had a “distressing” experience being arrested. An officer twisted his arm behind his back “until it cracked”, he said, which tore his nerve and caused pain for a year.
Mr Hick said he would never have tolerated anything illegal – from himself or from his employees – and several character witnesses defended his character.
He was described as a “brilliant, very hard-working, kind and caring” man, and a “calm” employer who always found a solution to problems.
He was “invaluable” as a trustee to a charity he ran, a witness added.
The trial continues and is expected to conclude today.
