Allegations of Sexual Abuse
	False Allegations
	John Edgar case
	Waikato Times April 20 1998 Accusations of indecency go back to '91 Former Hamilton primary school teacher John Timothy Edgar was first accused of inappropriate behaviour towards a pupil seven years ago. Edgar denied the allegation and no further action was taken, the school's principal told a Hamilton District Court jury today. Edgar was charged with indecent assault relating to the incident in 1991 following a similar allegation last November. Judge Lynton Laing suppressed the school's name to protect the identities of alleged victims due to give evidence at the trial that started today. Edgar's supporters took up most of the public gallery's front row. He occasionally smiled and waved to them. Edgar faces seven counts of indecent assault against boys aged under 12 and one of performing an indecent act upon a boy aged under 12. The principal was the first Crown witness called by Crown prosecutor David Wilson, QC. He explained that a parent had complained that Edgar had looked at her son's penis while he was getting changed after falling over and getting dirty. The principal said he had spoken to the accused when the allegation was made in 1991. Edgar denied the allegation and said he was only helping the boy change clothes. The principal said he told Edgar it was inappropriate for him to be alone with a child who was getting changed. Earlier Mr Wilson had detailed an allegation made last November that Edgar had rewarded a child with lollies to get changed into a pair of togs. Mr Wilson said the principal was given the information by his deputy and police were called. It was alleged Edgar had touched the boy and told him that if he told other children he would "run out of lollies". Mr Wilson said the boy told a friend about the incident and they approached the headmaster. Edgar was suspended on full pay that afternoon and later resigned. Edgar's counsel Roger Laybourn, in his opening statement to the jury, said the defence would be the allegations were untrue. He told the jury of nine women and three men to put aside any emotions because emotions "would only cloud your judgment". He described Edgar as a popular teacher who had never done anything to suggest the alleged offences were occurring. He said the evidence from witnesses was emotionally charged.