A FORMER postman has today been convicted of raping a seven-year-old schoolgirl five years ago.

Divorcee Vincent Laux mounted the horrific sex attack in the flat where he lived alone.

He warned the victim to keep his vile behaviour a secret but she complained to her mother last year and he was arrested.

A jury at Worcester Crown Court took over eight hours to convict Laux, of Gibbons Crescent, Stourport, of rape by a 10-2 majority.

In April another jury convicted him of indecency with a child when he committed a sex act on himself in front of her.

But that jury was unable to reach a verdict on the rape charge and a retrial was ordered.

Judge Patrick Thomas QC warned 45-year-old Laux he was facing a substantial prison sentence.

He adjourned the case until the week beginning October 5 for a pre-sentence report to be prepared and granted Laux bail.

Father-of-two Laux's marriage broke down and he got divorced nine years ago.

He stripped naked before raping the girl in the Kidderminster flat he was living in at the time, said David Iles, prosecuting.

The attack made her cry and she told police "it hurt really bad".

Doctors who examined her last year found her perfectly normal but Mr Iles said any injury would have healed because of the passage of time.

Laux warned the girl not to say anything or he would be sent to jail.

The rape victim suffered nightmares and flashbacks and asked her mother what she would do to a rapist.

Her mother is said to have replied that she would kill a child sex attacker.

During a police interview Laux did recall sexual behaviour in front of a child in another incident when his life was at a low ebb.

He claimed he was depressed and drinking heavily.

Mr Iles said the rape victim said nothing for years because she was intimidated.

But after plucking up courage to describe "the awful event" she stuck to her story.

Mr Iles described bald-headed Laux as an "utterly selfish" man who lied in court to try and save his own neck.

He told the jury to contrast the girl's "steadfastness" against Laux's "weasel words" and said she had given evidence which was damning in its detail.

Abigail Nixon, defending, said the lack of medical evidence should have caused alarm bells to ring in the case.

She claimed the girl made changes in her evidence during the two trials.