The case against an alleged rapist who told police he "rushed into" sex is "not about hindsight or what he should have done", a defence barrister has said.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
But, a prosecutor has asked why the man apologised in a series of texts if he believed the sex was consensual.
Counsel gave closing addresses in the jury trial of Thomas Earle, 26, in the ACT Supreme Court on Thursday.
The Weetangera man has pleaded not guilty to three counts of sexual intercourse without consent and one count of act of indecency without consent.
After nearly four days of evidence and submissions, Chief Justice Lucy McCallum sent the jury to begin deliberations about 2.30pm.
Earle is accused of raping a close friend while staying the night at her home on December 29, 2021.
The court heard Earle met the woman on the dating app Hinge and they dated for about a month before deciding to be friends.
On the night in in question, the woman invited Earle to her home for dinner and they smoked marijuana, drank alcohol and shared jungle juice.
The prosecution states they then watched a movie in the lounge room and the woman went to bed while Earle stayed up.
It is alleged the woman awoke at around 2am to find the accused spooning her and touching her genitals.
Earle is accused of then raping her in three different ways.
In his closing address, defence barrister James Sabharwal argued his client had believed, at the time, the woman was consenting.
He claimed while Earle had not verbally asked for consent, the accused and the woman had kissed before having sex, and she had displayed similar conduct to past experiences.
The prosecution alleges the pair had not kissed and the woman had "frozen" in fear.
Mr Sabharwal told the jury the trial was not about whether the woman had consented, but about Earle's state of mind at the time.
"It's not about what was on [the accused's] mind the following morning upon reflection on the night before," he said.
"It's not about hindsight, not about what he should have done, or could have done.
"It's about whether he was reckless."
Mr Sabharwal argued Earle was a man of good character who had no criminal record.
Prosecutor Beth Morrisroe, in her closing address, argued if the woman was asleep when Earle had started sexual acts, she could not have consented.
She said the alleged victim was "open and honest" while giving evidence both to police and in court.
Ms Morrisroe told the jury they should reject Earle's evidence, saying it "doesn't have that ring of truth about it" and was not consistent.
She argued text messages Earle sent the day after the alleged rape - apologising for his "awful behaviour" and saying he was a "stupid person who only considers what I want" - did not sit well with his evidence.
READ ALSO:
"If what really happened was they had consensual sex... what is this 'awful behaviour' he is apologising for? He hadn't been presented with an allegation at this point," Ms Morrisroe asked the jury.
"I suspect you will find the evidence on the issue of consent in general largely unconvincing."
Jury deliberations are set to continue on Friday.
Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:
- Bookmark canberratimes.com.au
- Download our app
- Make sure you are signed up for our breaking and regular headlines newsletters
- Follow us on Twitter
- Follow us on Instagram
