A MAN who is on trial for alleged historic sex offences dating back to the 1980s has been described by friends and family as 'honest' and committed to his charity work, a court heard.

Keith Bloomfield, aged 64, of Normandy Way, Bridport, is accused of multiple sexual offences involving an underage girl in west Dorset between September 26, 1985 and May 11, 1987, which he denies. The complainant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is now 50.

On the fifth day of the trial, the jury heard character references for Bloomfield and the prosecution and defence then presented their full arguments.

Bloomfield was described as a man who was honest, supportive and kind, with many saying he was committed to his charity work.

In a police interview he described the accusations against him as 'fiction' and 'rubbish'.

Prosecutor Gordon Ross asked the jury why a woman would fabricate a story which she had mentioned over so many years to numerous people and go to several health professionals with mental health complaints citing unwanted sexual incidents just to make a report more than 30 years later to the police against Bloomfield.

Mr Ross said: "He was 28 years old and she was 15 and he took advantage of her.

"You have to be satisfied that she was under 16 years old. The defence has latched onto this issue of age.

"Mr Bloomfield himself has told you that he met [the alleged victim] before his wedding.

"She was 15 at the time of his marriage and he said he would have known her for a few months before then, so there is no dispute between [the alleged victim] and Mr Bloomfield that when they met through the [organisation] she was under 16 years old.

"Why is he so desperate to distance himself from [the complainant]?"

Referring to when the complainant was cross examined, Mr Ross said the claimant was 'adamant' that Bloomfield was in his late 20s. Mr Ross said Bloomfield took advantage of her 'youth and vulnerability'.

He said: "She was not of any age where she could consent."

Janick Fielding, defending, said the complainant was not a credible witness and said that they 'lied through their teeth'.

Mr Fielding reminded the jury that the claimant said the alleged abuse was happening for about a year before Bloomfield moved house with his partner at the time. The officer overseeing the case provided evidence from a land registry which proved that Bloomfield bought the house in June 1988, by which time the alleged victim would have been 17.

Mr Fielding said the alleged victim, after hearing this during her cross examination, said that the abuse could have been happening for two years before Bloomfield moved house.

He said: "She just expanded her time frame by about a year, off the cuff."

He said the the complainant had 'embellished her evidence' to help her case against Bloomfield.

The trial continues.