A HOMELESS west Cumbrian man has been cleared of burgling Workington’s Morrisons store in the dead of night.

At Carlisle’s Rickergate court, 46-year-old Lee Moore told magistrates that he was nowhere near the Derwent Drive store in the early hours of May 27 when an intruder was caught on CCTV prowling around the store.

In a one-hour trial, the court heard evidence from Police Constable Joseph Richardson, who was called to the store after the alarm activated at 2.34am.

An inspection of the building revealed an insecure fire exit and a review of CCTV later showed that the camera had captured images of a man, wearing a green-coloured baseball cap, searching a part of the store.

He was seen acting suspiciously, at one point clambering over the customer service desk and searching for things to steal before running away.

Asked by prosecutor George Shelley if he recognised the man, PC Richardson said he did. He said he was already aware of Mr Moore and that he was the person seen in the CCTV images.

“I have known Mr Moore for quite a while," said the officer, adding: "I am 100 per cent certain that it was him.” 

Under questioning from defence lawyer Sean Harkin, the officer accepted that the CCTV images were grainy. The court heard that two days later police had caught up with Mr Moor in Senhouse Street, Workington.

At the time he was wearing a distinctive green baseball cap; it featured a Maxfly logo on its front. In response to a series of questions from officers about the burglary and his whereabouts on that night, he replied “Wasn’t me” thirteen times.

Asked if the cap he was wearing when arrested was the one seen on the burglar in the CCTV images, he replied: “No.” He said that at the time when the store was being burgled, he had been in his tent in Flimby.

Commenting on the CCTV image of the burglary, he said: “It doesn’t look like me.” Mr Harkin said the prosecution had resulted from a case of mistaken recognition.”

Giving their not guilty verdict, magistrates said there was a weakness in the prosecution’s identification evidence.  They highlighted the poor lighting and the grainy quality of the CCTV images. Nor did the CCTV image clearly identify the burglar’s cap.

Of the police officer’s evidence, the presiding magistrate added: “We found him to be an honest witness but we are of the view that he may have been mistaken." The magistrate told Mr Moore: "We are therefore not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that you are the alleged burglar and therefore find you not guilty.”

There was no suggestion that anything was stolen in the burglary.