There was no "clarity of communication" about sexual boundaries before a man was allegedly raped during a dating app meet-up, a court has heard.
Daniel William Monie faced the third day of his ACT Supreme Court trial on Wednesday after pleading not guilty to two counts of sexual intercourse without consent.
The alleged incident took place in December 2021, when another man came to Monie's home after speaking on LGBTQIA+ dating app Grindr.
Parties disagree about the "critical issue of consent" relating to alleged single acts of penile-anal and digital rape.
The court previously heard the alleged victim had told Monie "not now, not keen", during a physical prompting for penetrative sex, and that he had verbally rejected the idea during conversation.
It is also said he physically rejected a previous attempt of such an act.
In his closing address, defence barrister Matthew Johnston SC told jurors his client had a reasonable belief the alleged victim was consenting to the two acts in question.
Mr Johnston said Monie asked the man, "do you want me?" before one, which he claimed the alleged victim responded to with "yes".
While the prosecution deemed the question as inadequate, the barrister described it as an "appropriate enquiry" for consent.
"You might well think those words alone in that context were sufficient to show there was consent," Mr Johnston said.
The barrister said his client reached for and applied lubricant in view of the alleged victim before the other alleged act.
"This is not an act that was stealthy in any way," he said.
Mr Johnston also said his client stopped once the alleged victim indicated being in pain.
"You might think that's consistent with a person who is not out there to sexually assault someone," the barrister said.
Jurors heard that while the victim had claimed telling Monie he did not want to engage in any penetrative sex and only wanted to do "softcore" stuff, there was no clear evidence to support this.
"It's disputed there was any clear rejection of penetrative sex," Mr Johnston said.
The barrister also told jurors the alleged victim had cuddled and engaged in consensual sexual conduct after the alleged assaults before leaving hours later.
Prosecutor Skye Jerome asked jurors to use their common sense and said the "overwhelmed" alleged victim was in "absolute shock and disbelief" after being "physically violated".
"I'm sure it doesn't come as a surprise to hear everybody reacts differently to trauma and there is no common way for a person to react to sexual abuse," Ms Jerome said.
"There are many reasons why a victim will not immediately challenge their abuser or tell anyone it occurred."
The prosecutor said Monie could not have had a reasonable belief the alleged victim was consenting to the acts in question.
"[The alleged victim] was clear in communication he did not consent to anal penetration," she said.
Ms Jerome said there was "no miscommunication" and "no ambiguity" in the alleged victim's physical boundaries.
The trial continues.
- Support is available for those who may be distressed. Phone Lifeline 13 11 14; MensLine 1300 789 978; 1800-RESPECT 1800 737 732.
