Jack de Belin's actions on the night he allegedly raped a young woman in Wollongong were "morally wrong" but not criminal, his defence has told the court.
The 29-year-old's barrister, David Campbell SC, finished his closing remarks by telling the jury that the St George Illawarra Dragons forward let his guard down.
"He conducted himself in a way that was morally wrong — he knows that," Mr Campbell said.
"He cheated on his partner, he knows that.
"He should have been more considerate of those he was with, including the complainant — he knows that."
Mr Campbell told the members of the jury it was not their responsibility to adjudicate on the moral behaviour of Mr de Belin, but to determine if there was sufficient reliable evidence to convince them he was guilty of the crime.
"You are not called on to make a judgement as to the morals," he said.
"This is a criminal court charged with an adjudication by of each of you as to whether a grave crime has occurred.
"While that which happened is not something to be praised, it certainly does not, for the reasons we've outlined, involve any criminal conduct."
Complainant's testimony 'unreliable'
Mr Campbell told the jurors they could not rely on the complainant's version of events because of what he said were contradictions in her testimony.
"It will be apparent to you that there have been numerous alterations in the various accounts of the complainant," he said.
"Such that her evidence is plainly internally inconsistent and for that reason is thus unreliable."
"The combined effect is, in our submission, overwhelming and leads to the irresistible conclusion that the complainant's evidence is unreliable and cannot be acted upon, let alone be a foundation for proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt."
'Let's get high' message deleted
The jury was reminded of a text message exchange between the complainant and her friend, Andrew Kyriacou, to whom she wrote "let's get high" on the night of the alleged rape.
Mr Campbell told the jurors that the message was not noted by the police when they examined her phone at the time of the complaint, but was disclosed in a later statement.
"The irresistible inference that arises is that before the police had access to her telephone she had deleted the messages with Andrew from her phone," he said.
"She well knew about the conversations she had and that's why she deleted them."
"An active act to try and conceal from the police, from the prosecution, from the defence, and most importantly from [the jury], what she had been up to that night and was intent on doing that night."
Mr Campbell argued the complainant lied in her initial statement to police, claiming she sent the message to Mr Kyriacou telling him she wanted to get high "because of what happened to her".
He told the jury she had in fact sent the message during the tuk-tuk ride to Mr de Belin's cousin's apartment, where the sexual assault allegedly occurred.
'Those guys f*****g abused me'
Mr Campbell referred to evidence in the trial about a Snapchat message sent by the complainant to an acquaintance, Tom Strong, claiming she had been sexually abused by the defendants.
Mr Strong approached the complainant when she was in an Uber vehicle with the two defendants after the alleged assault, and Mr de Belin took a bite out of a meat pie Mr Strong was eating.
The complainant sent Mr Strong a message half an hour later saying, "Those guys you saw me with just f*****g abused me sexually".
Mr Campbell suggested the complainant might have realised she was in a car with a prominent Wollongong individual who was in a relationship.
"Could she then, in an attempt to put the bushfire out, to stop the rumour mill as it were, suddenly say, 'I was sexually abused by those guys'?" Mr Campbell said.
Detective 'crafted' statement, defence says
Jurors were told to consider the conduct of lead detective Shawn Adams when considering the prosecution's case.
Senior Constable Adams interviewed the complainant on the evening of December 9, 2018.
He told the court there was no victim statement available from that interview.
Mr Campbell argued it was simply "unbelievable" that the interview was not recorded.
"He well knew that whatever was said in that room differed — and differed in material respects — from the end product that he and he alone generated from the complainant," he said.
"He didn't want either the prosecution, or the defence, or [the jury] to know what he had been told that afternoon.
"He wanted to wait and craft a statement into a form he was happy with."
Mr Campbell also told the court that Senior Constable Adams failed to take a statement from Mr Kyriacou.
"When an honest police officer … came onto the scene, the statement with Mr Kyriacou's phone record was given to police a matter of days before the trial," Mr Campbell said.
"The result of what Mr Adams has and has not done is that the accused have been put into a situation of significant prejudice and disadvantage, and have thereby been prejudiced in the conduct of their defences."
The trial, before Judge Andrew Haesler, continues.
