A 'Mrs. Robinson ego thing': Former youth worker on trial for sexual interference with 14-year-old

A Calgaryjudge presiding over the trial of a former child services youth worker accused of having sex with a 14-year-old back in the 1990s heard tearful testimony from the alleged victim on Tuesday.

Beverly Allard, 65, faces a charge of sexual exploitation. She was 31 years old when she's alleged to have begun a years-long sexual relationship with a teenager who was under the care of Alberta's Child and Family Services (CFS) at William Roper Hull Homes in Calgary.

On Tuesday, thenow 47-year-old man testified about the experience he had with Allard, who was assigned as his case worker after his mother relinquished care of him.

Allard's attention on the boy fostered a "crush," he told prosecutor Donna Spaner on Tuesday.

• Former youth worker on trial for alleged sexual relationship with 14-year-old boy in care

At times throughout his testimony, the witness cried as he relived the feelings he once had.

"You knew I loved you," he told Allard as she sat in the prisoner'sbox on the other side of the courtroom.

CBC News will identify the man as A.B., which are not his real initials, in order to comply with a publication ban put in place to protect his identity.

The judge heard testimony from A.B. in the morning. In the afternoon, the prosecution entered into evidence a 26-page handwritten statementAllard provided to police in 1998.

Closing arguments will be made Wednesday. Defence lawyerDale Kniselydid not call any evidence.

'She took an extra interest in me'

A.B. has lived on the streets and has been in and out of jail since his relationship with Allard ended.

The relationship began in 1989, when the two met. It became sexual in 1990, after A.B. turned 14, the Crown alleges.

A.B. said Allard paid more attention to him than the other kids at the home. It made him feel special, he said.

"I started to kind of have a crush on her because she took an extra interest in me," A.B. told Spaner.

One night, A.B. went to Allard's home. They wrestled and tickled each other, ending up on her bed, according to A.B.

'Happily ever after'

He testified that they held each other.

"Before the sun came up, it was done," he said.

In her own statement to police years later, Allard confirmed the pair had sex that night.

"I was just happy to have that closeness," said A.B. "It's just something I hadn't had since I had a mother."

After that night, A.B. said of Allard, "it was now a sexual relationship."

"We would be partners or whatever with happily ever after."

'What I did was wrong'

As the boy entered his later teenage years, the two began to live together as a couple.

But Allard told police that he threatened her with violence and with disclosing their relationship to authorities.

Eight years after it all started, Allard who was living in Edmonton by then had enough and went to police.

In July 1998, Allard submitted a 26-page handwritten statement to Edmonton Det. Mike Weir.

"I know that what I did was wrong," she wrote.

"I know that I can be held responsible for a criminal offence. I have lived in my own prison for the past six years, and I can't subject myself to this any longer. This is why I have come forward."

A 'Mrs. Robinson ego thing'

Allard wrote that she was "surprised, and I suppose a little flattered," to receive A.B.'s attention back in 1990.

"For his age, [the boy] was an extremely attractive and charming young man, and I know he liked me.

"God knows why I let this happen," wrote Allard. "I'm not sure if it was some stupid selfish Mrs. Robinson ego thing I had going on in my head."

On Tuesday afternoon, retired Det. Weir testified that he had no recollection of taking Allard's statement in 1998 or of the investigation.

Weir did confirm that as part of his police report, he attached a section of the Criminal Code dealing with sexual exploitation.

In her opening statement delivered Monday, Spaner said Weir referred the case to the Calgary Police Service.

The file sat dormant for 24 years.

CPS said that because the case is before the courts, it could not comment on why laying a charge took more than two decades.