December 2016: Boyd was charged with threatening and abusive manner.

He appeared at Dundee Crown Court on Monday 12th December and was sentenced to 175 hours community service which must be finished within a period of 6 months

June 2014

Stonemason forced way into customer’s home and carried out sex attack

 

 

A stonemason who forced his way into the home of a customer before sexually assaulting her has been jailed.

Alan Boyd, who also attacked a teenage girl days later, was seen as a respected businessman in north-east Fife and travelled across the country to work.

A trial heard on Wednesday how Boyd targeted his first victim after he she hired him to do some work. He followed the woman at her home in Ceres before blocking her path and refusing to let her past on August 18, 2012.

Boyd then burst into her home, grabbed her round the waist, repeatedly attempted to kiss her and felt her bottom.

The attack came after many months of harassment where he repeatedly made comments of a sexual nature.

Three weeks later Boyd launched an attack on a girl aged 16 in the same village.

On September 9, 2012, he followed the girl and refused to let her pass before touching her inappropriately. Boyd also exposed himself during the attack.

The trial was also told that over a period of eight months between December 2010 and August 2011, Boyd had repeatedly made sexual comments and gestures to the girl he later sexually assaulted as well as another child.

Boyd, 49, of High Street, Ceres, Fife, pleaded not guilty to the four charges against him but was found guilty after a trial.

George Donnelly, defending, urged a sheriff not to jail Boyd.

He told Dundee Sheriff Court on Wednesday: “He is a man who travels across Scotland for his work, lives well and provides for his family. He would comply with any condition of a community payback order.”

But Sheriff Charles Macnair QC said a prison term was the “only appropriate disposal”.

He jailed Boyd for seven months, and said: “These offences were committed on different dates and the communications offences took place over a period of time.

“The first complainer had originally had you in her house because of your work. On the night in question you forced your way into her house – she was entitled to keep you out.

“Having regard to the nature of these offences, and in particular the age of the second complainer and the fact you invaded the house of the first victim, there’s no appropriate alternative but a custodial sentence.”