The defence admits that a Child, Youth and Family youth worker broke the rules and "did inexcusable things", but it denies he had a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl in the department's care.
The youth worker's defence team elected to call no evidence after the crown closed its case on the third day of the trial, and the Christchurch District Court trial has now heard closing addresses from both sides.
Judge Michael Crosbie will sum up from 9.15am tomorrow before the jury retires to consider its verdict on two charges of unlawful sexual connection with the girl, and one of meeting her after grooming her for sex. The 38-year-old man denies all charges.
Defence counsel Andrew McKenzie told the court the girl had made allegations of events that had not happened and could not have happened.
He said if the accused had walked into her bedroom at the Child, Youth and Family facility where he worked, he would have been in view of video surveillance. Anyone sitting in the "hub" work station would also have had a clear view of the area.
Yet the girl said he texted her, then went to the door of the room and she gave him oral sex.
He said if the jury concluded that the girl had lied, could it rely on her other evidence.
She had also told of the man visiting her in Auckland after she had been moved to a home there. She claimed she ran away from her accommodation, met him and they had sex on a grassy area in Manukau.
But Mr McKenzie said her evidence was unreliable. She had written to the man saying she only wanted to talk to him, and afterwards she had told a social worker than she had only talked to him.
To convict the man, the jury had to be sure that it had happened.
Mr McKenzie acknowledged that the two had "an unhealthy relationship".
"Clearly he did not follow the rules and broke a number of them," he said. Sending explicit text messages to the girl was wrong, and retaining naked images of her that she had put on his cellphone was also wrong.
"A lot of evidence does not reflect well on him," Mr McKenzie said.
Crown prosecutor Lisa Preston said the crown had produced an abundance of evidence that did not depend on the evidence of the girl. She had consented to what happened and had not been an unwilling recipient of the man's attention.
She said there was no evidence to support the defence that he had met her in Auckland to help her. It was not a legitimate meeting and the evidence overwhelmingly supported verdicts of guilty on each charge.
