Thame ‘hairologist’ denies sex accusations

THE court in the trial of self-proclaimed hair consultant, Praminder Mankoo, today heard some of his own account of one of the 11 sexual offences he stands accused of.
In a read transcript of a police interview made after a complaint by yesterday’s ‘knight in shining armour’ witness, the defendant, Mankoo, denied that he had asked particularly about the sort of underwear she like wearing. He said that he asked her what she liked to wear generally that made her feel good, including jewellery, make-up etc.

In further questioning by a police officer in the interview, Mankoo denied moving the woman’s bra straps down her shoulders and of seeing her bra at any time. He further maintained that he only massaged her neck, shoulders underneath her top, and her back after she had lifted the top up over her head. He replied with a catagorical “No” to suggestions that he rubbed or caressed her in anyway and refuted massaging her breasts.

“I am well aware to stay away from there,” he said.

Mankoo maintained that the session was only a demonstration of what the full treatment would be and that the complainant was told that the full treatment would involve the removal of clothes and gowns.

“I didn’t want to surprise her with anything,” he said. “I was just trying to improve her self image.”

Earlier in the proceedings the jury had heard from another complainant, one of eight, who had visited Mankoo’s clinic, Hairology in Thame, for the first time in July, 2007. She said that she had called a hault to her ‘treatment’ by asking for a drink of water because she felt that having Mankoo ask her “if she felt sexy” and touching her breasts, “didn’t seem like a normal thing to do for a scalp problem.”

This same witness had to leave the courtroom to regain her composure, after becoming visibly upset as she re-read the statement she had made to the police on the day of the alleged offence.

Mankoo said that after they had left the massage room, the woman sat on a sofa laughing and joking with his receptionist and chatting about the products whe was to take away with her.

“She didn’t look like someone who wanted to get out,” he said.

Another statement, by the sister of a former, temporary employee about an incident that also occured in 2007, was also read out in court this morning. The statement said that Mankoo offered the complainant “a treat for her work there” and after locking the door, had “put his fingers down the front of her chest” and told the woman that he was going to “bring out my little friend” and produced a vibrator.

In the statement, the witness said that her sister had told Mankoo that she had been abused as a child to try to make him stop, and that she had told the employment agency not to send any more women to “that horrible man.”

Her sister had been very subdued and distressed, said the witness in her statement, and had found it difficult to sleep but wanted to put the incident behind her.

The case continues tomorrow at Oxford Crown Court.

Photo: Praminder Mankoo in his consulting rooms; picture from www.hairology.co.uk