More on KentOnline
More on KentOnline
Home Canterbury News Article
A “terrifying” stalker followed his blind victim with a banner accusing him of being a thief after smashing up his workplace.
Homeless Paul Porteus, 60, cycled around Canterbury with the sign emblazoned “Paul Todd is a thief” on occasions between January and March.
One morning, Porteus smashed seven windows of homeless charity Catching Lives’ office, where Mr Todd worked.
Mr Todd, an aspiring politician, said he was terrified for his family and shelved his Canterbury City Council election campaign.
A court heard Porteus accused the Labour party member of stealing £1,000 from him while using the charity’s services in October.
But when Mr Todd denied the allegation, Porteus caused £1,500 worth of damage to the charity’s base before embarking on months of torment.
Riding his bike, Porteus repeatedly swooped at Mr Todd, calling him “a fat thief” and other obscenities in public.
"I was extremely frightened he would find out about my family..." Paul Todd
Mr Todd, who suffers cataracts and glaucoma, became so terrified on one occasion he asked a stranger to help rush him to a friend’s home.
But Porteus traced his victim to the Nunnery Road address and picketed with the sign emblazoned “Paul Todd is a thief".
Porteus was arrested outside the property on day two of his banner-campaign, and was found to be carrying a knife.
Mr Todd told a jury he closed his curtains when at home and made his children walk ahead while outside.
He added: “I wouldn’t hear him coming, I wouldn’t see him coming - it wasn’t very pleasant.
“I would lock all the doors and windows and shut the curtains even in the day - I was extremely frightened by his behaviour.
“I was extremely frightened he would find out about my family.
“I didn’t tend to go anywhere on my own. I suspended my election campaign for 10 days because I feared for my campaigners' safety.”
Ian Foinette, defending, argued Mr Todd stole the £1,000 which explained Porteus’ prolonged anger.
But prosecutor James Cartwright poured cold water over the claim, saying the money never existed and “the devil makes work for idle hands”.
A jury unanimously acquitted Porteus of stalking with intent to cause fear but found him guilty of stalking, a lesser charge.
They also found him guilty of two counts of criminal damage and not guilty of carrying a bladed article after two hours and 45 minutes of deliberating.
During the three-day trial, Porteus claimed he earned the windfall carrying out groundworks for travellers outside Canterbury.
Giving evidence, he argued the knife was in case of a punctured tyre and he only ever happened on Mr Todd by chance.
He told the court he had “no recollection” of breaking windows and asserted he wasn’t the culprit shown in CCTV footage.
"I have no doubt that you caused Mr Todd distress..." Judge Brown
Mr Todd was cross-examined by Mr Foinette about the alleged stolen money.
“Mr Porteus gave you an envelope containing a thousand pounds didn’t he?" Mr Foinette asked him.
“Not to my recollection,” Mr Todd replied.
Mr Foinette continued: “The procedure adopted is the envelope was provided by you, that the seal was stuck down, both of you signed across that seal."
“No, I don’t recall that happening,” Mr Todd replied.
“Then it was taken into your custody. Mr Porteus asked for a receipt and you pointed to the CCTV camera.
“When a few weeks later he asked for some of the money that is when you said there wasn’t any money,” the barrister added.
Giving evidence, Porteus, who has no previous convictions, maintained he gave Mr Todd the cash.
"We went behind the counter, he (Mr Todd) brought out an envelope, put it (the money) in and sealed the envelope.
"He said to sign along the seal which was very strange.
"I asked for a receipt and he said it is on CCTV.
“I gave the money to Mr Todd to look after because I planned on opening a bank account."
Judge Brown sentenced Porteus to 12 weeks in prison, but he will be released immediately given time already spent on remand.
"I have no doubt that you caused Mr Todd distress," she said.
"This is a case consisting of persistent action by you for a relatively long period.
"What you did was continually call him a thief on numerous occasions and I have no doubt you were outside his friend's house with that placard."
For information on how we can report on court proceedings, click here.
