THE woman who accused a Thame hair consultant of trying to force her to commit a sexual act during a massage session, today reputed in court that she herself became sexually aroused during her treatment, and that she willing gave him manual relief (Ed’s words).
The same witness, in the trial of Praminder Mankoo, of Oakley, near Thame, yesterday described how her search for treatment to prevent thinning hair led her to report her experiences at his clinic to the police.
(See yesterday’s report).
A second witness today told Oxford Crown Court how she herself had visited Mankoo’s clinic in Thame, but had called an end to her treatment when she became uncomfortable that his comments were becoming more and more sexual.
The Chair of the Institute of Trichologists, Marilyn Sherlock, told the court how Mankoo had been struck off by her organisation in 1998, after a disciplinary hearing relating to a complaint from ‘patient’ and his acceptance of a caution by the police. She said that there is no clinical evidence that head massage relieves stress, that may lead to hair loss, and that massage of the breast area was not considered to be part of any treatment her members administered.
A beautician who went to see Mankoo in the summer of 2004, when she feared her hair was falling out, told the court how he used a vibrating massage machine over her nipples and then proceeded to massage her feet and thighs, supposedly to relieve the stress that was causing her hair loss.
She recalled feeling that the situation was moving towards something sexual when Mankoo encouraged her to remove her bra and the gown she had been given, and suggested that she “touch herself where ever she liked.”
She recalled keeping her eyes closed because she felt embarrassed and uncomfortable, and then, when she eventually opened them, she said, she saw Mankoo was standing in his boxer shorts. She described burn-like marks on his chest. The Defence suggested said she could have seen these even if he had been wearing his white coat, but the witness insisted that he had removed his coat.
It was at this point she said, that she had to leave, paid her bill and made another appointment which she had no intention of keeping.
She was then questioned by the Defence as to why she did not tell anyone about what had happened until two years later when she met Mankoo again at the Social cafe/bar in Thame. Her husband later told the court how his wife had told him and the barman at the Social, “No woman should be left alone with that man,” and he began to suspect that something upsetting had happened to her at Mankoo’s clinic.
The witness’s reply was that she had been “too embarrassed and ashamed to mention it,” but felt that it ought to come out into the open when she saw a news report about Mankoo’s arrest on the television.
When asked why she didn’t end the massage session sooner, the woman replied that she felt “stupidly, in a situation that she could not get out of – out of fear – out of control.”
Defence counsel, Christine Agnew, suggested to this witness that Mankoo did not remove his trousers nor touch her inappropriately, to which whe replied that he most definitely had.
The Prosecution counsel then read out statements made by another complainant’s husband and daughter which spoke of the woman’s ‘agitation’ and how she was “angry and upset” after having been to see Mankoo with a hair problem. Like previous witnesses, this woman too was said to have experienced sexual innuendo and had it suggested to her by Mankoo that she wear different underwear for her next appointment.
The final witness of the day was a previous, temporary employee of Mankoo’s. She described how she had eventually agreed to a free massage by him on a quiet afternoon when there were no clients, because he suggested it might relieve some of the stress she was experiencing following the break up of a relationship.
After removing her top clothes and going along with the massage, she began to feel uncomfortable, she said, when Mankoo asked her: “If these were someone else’s hands, what would you want them to do?”
She then asked for the massage to stop, saying that she just was not able to relax.
The woman continued to go into work a couple of times after the incident, she said, but never felt comfortable with her employer again. She put the whole thing to the back of her mind, she said, but decided to do something about what had happened when she saw a police notice about an investigation into complaints against Mr Mankoo, thinking that “now something needed to be said. It had been playing on my mind, she said. “I felt stupid and gullible to let things go on as they did.”
“I felt unclean after the massage; like an ostrich I tried to forget it.”
The case continues tomorrow.