A woman who claimed that Chris Langham took her virginity at 14 was “sick”, the actor said in evidence yesterday.

She made jokes about killing his children and had violent fantasies about him punching her in the face, he told Maidstone Crown Court.

The 58-year-old comedy actor denies indecent assault and buggery, and downloading child pornography.

He was accused by Richard Barraclough, QC, for the prosecution, of being “prepared to torture her [the woman] by making outrageous allegations against her”. But Mr Langham said of his alleged victim, now aged 25: “She’s a sick person. I’ve never made any allegations against her. I mean that in a compassionate way. It’s not a criticism or judgment. I can’t say I like her very much, but everybody deserves compassion.”

The court has been told that Mr Langham gave acting lessons to the woman in his dressing room, when he was starring in Les Misérables in the West End. She claims that she lost her virginity to him shortly afterwards in a London hotel.

Mr Langham said that she had been disturbed by his arrest on child pornography charges in November 2005. “She was very upset by the charges,” he said, “and she said she thought I was guilty. She wanted to know if my relationship with her was not affected by a sexual interest in children.”

She was also worried that “I was looking at her in that way”, the actor said, adding: “I was able to say that I wasn’t.”

Mr Langham denied being frightened that the woman would complain to police about their alleged sexual relationship. He admitted having sex with her when she was 18, but said that he regretted it.

When asked why he offered the woman free theatre tickets , Mr Langham said: “The thing you have to remember is I have always been fond of her. She was a terribly frail person.”

He was arrested again in September 2006, this time for allegedly having underage sex with her. The actor described his arrest as a “terrifying” experience, saying that he returned home to Kent from a family holiday in Cornwall to avoid being arrested in front of his children.

Mr Barraclough suggested that the actor had been a father figure to the woman. Mr Langham said: “I hope there was love and affection between us. There’s nothing dishonourable about that.”

When asked why he thought she had told her best friend and a doctor that she had sex with him, he replied: “I think I’m the only person who didn’t do anything to her. I tried to behave in an honourable way with her. But I have to say, this is a family that don’t have relationships, they take hostages.”

Mr Langham, who lives near Cran-brook in Kent, denies 15 counts of making an indecent photograph of a childbetween September and November 2005. He also denies six counts of indecent assault and two counts of buggery between January 1996 and April 2000. Four further counts of indecent assault were dropped after the Crown accepted there was no evidence to support them.

Later the court heard from Mr Langham’s doctor and close friend, who thought the actor’s close relationship with his alleged victim was unwise but not sexual. Michael Wilks said that he was not aware that the two had a sexual relationship.

Dr Wilks said he met the girl when he visited Mr Langham backstage at a theatre where he was performing. He said: “It didn’t concern me in the sense that there must be something going on sexually with him and this girl, but I realised straight away that other people might jump to conclusions.

“That’s not a normal relationship that one would expect to see. I just think it was unwise.”

Tracy Stiles, who worked in the costume department of Les Misérables at the time that Mr Langham is alleged to have abused the girl, said if there had been anything going on between them she would have heard about it.

Mr Langham broke down in tears twice as he heard evidence from other close friends. The trial continues.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Oh no, Mr Darling: you have failed
• BBC survives dogfight over Kennel Club expose
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone