"[The complainant’s] been accused of fabricating this whole thing, but the only one fabricating things is the defendant," Crown prosecutor Richard Smith said in his closing statement yesterday.
Pierre Rewi Anglem (42) is on trial on four sex charges, one of possessing a hammer and one of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
The Crown’s case focused on the honesty and accuracy of the complainant and why the jury should believe she was telling the truth.
Mr Smith stressed she admitted when she had made a mistake, or others had.
When being examined by the doctor, the complainant made sure to point out whether scars were from previous incidents or the alleged sexual assault.
"She’s making sure the doctors are getting it right. She’s making sure the police are getting it right," Mr Smith said.
Counsel Anne Stevens QC focused on a Facebook photo the complainant had used to identify Anglem to police.
The complainant "made a description of the person who raped her fit the picture", Mrs Stevens said in her closing.
The woman had been trying to figure out which gang members robbed her ex in the week before the incident and so had looked at countless photos of them, the court heard.
Mrs Stevens suggested the complainant had made a false rape complaint to get back at Anglem.
Though she did not know Anglem, the defence stressed the complainant had made up her mind that he was one of the thieves before he walked through her door on August 27, 2020.
While the complainant accepted she could have been mistaken and misidentified Anglem in the photo, Mr Smith said that was a sign she was an honest witness.
Her identification, he said, was "rock solid" because she immediately picked him out in a police photo montage.
"She never met this guy before that night and she picks him out straight away," Mr Smith said.
Another point of contention was the presence of a hammer which Anglem allegedly wielded before the attack.
"He’s got no business taking it into a house in the middle of the night ... and getting it out when they’re alone," Mr Smith said.
"There can only be one real intention for doing so."
Mrs Stevens suggested that, if the hammer had been there at all, it was not threatening.
Anglem put it away when the complainant commented that it looked dangerous, she told the jury.
The hammer terrified the complainant, Mr Smith said.
After the hammer was gone, and a conversation in which Anglem said the complainant had to "give him something", a consensual sex act allegedly happened.
Mr Smith suggested there was no consent on the woman’s part because she was so terrified and simply wanted him to leave.
Anglem must have known she was not consenting because she kept saying she could not breath, he suggested.
"Does that sound like wilfully performed oral sex?" Mr Smith said.
Mrs Stevens said the sex act was the complainant’s choice.
DNA evidence collected from a clump of hair the complainant said was ripped out placed Anglem at the scene.
It was three billion times more likely to be him than anyone else, the court heard.
Mrs Stevens maintained the evidence was collected by the woman to specifically frame Anglem.
Judge Michael Turner will sum up the case tomorrow before the jury retires to consider its verdicts.
