An Inverkeithing man claimed his "bizarre" actions were not sexually motivated when he made his friend's child dress up as a baby and filmed it.

Daniel Flinter, 31, of Manse Place, was babysitting a five-year-old girl when he forced her to wear a nappy and baby-gro then recorded her on his mobile phone while she removed them.

His solicitor admitted it was "clear he needs help" and he was not placed on the sex offenders register.

Depute fiscal Dev Kapadia told Dunfermline Sheriff Court that the accused was known to drink milk out of a baby's bottle and a police search of his home found prams, teddies, dummies and comforters.

Flinter was caught out when his partner's nephew had a hold of his mobile phone and the video started playing. The partner then told the victim's mother who reported it to the police.

He had previously pleaded guilty to acting in a threatening and abusive manner when he put a nappy and baby-gro on a child and filmed her removing them while she was under his care on April 15.

Sentence had been deferred while a report was compiled to analyse his intentions.

Defence agent Jonathan Matheson-Dear said that Flinter maintained his actions were not sexually motivated and said: "It is not known why my client acted in this way.

"A psychologist has said that he appears to have some sort of infantilism and this may have been triggered by bullying and the death of a parent as a child, but it is clear he needs help.

"He is extremely embarrassed by his behaviour."

Flinter avoided being placed on the sex offenders’ register but had restrictions placed on his contact with children under 16.

Sheriff Charles Macnair said: "This was very bizarre behaviour. Your issues are something you need to work out for yourself in private but when you inflict this behaviour on a child this becomes a matter for the public.

"Although this was not sexually motivated the impact on the child will still be significant."

Sheriff Macnair imposed a conduct requirement for three years which prevents Flinter from being with a child under 16 without the supervision of an adult.

He was also ordered to undertake a supervision requirement for three years and the court ordered the forfeiture of his mobile phone.