“(Robbed) invitation to a width of width. I thought you were exclusive, she might get free drinks”, Macinol said.
The woman has been driven to the pub and in a disabled bath.
“There was no mention of the event. He thought of robbed he had worn in the bathroom to offer a line of cocaine,” MacMicol said.
“I went in, the closed door. Put the arm around the neck and started kissing.”
Macnicol said the robbers are exposed and asked the woman perform a sexual act.
The woman responded “I don’t want to have sex with you,” Mcnicol told the jury.
The jury has heard robactions that they presultfully verbally and physical forced the woman in two sex acts in a brief time period.
“Feel felt that you feel Pressiurored … I felt henake it could not get away”, McNICOL said.
“We hear about his friends who was crying after, Panicking.”
The barrist defense defense said to the jury would not be a problem in the process that their customer was in the pub.
“It is accepted that sexual interaction has occurred”, he said.
Fungo said that a problem would be a “fact error.”
“In terms wide, if the person had a honest crigid that the person was related to be unrelated the pan, held a defense, so she said.
“Then I’m not guilty of the load.”
The jury has heard the test to try them beyond the reasonable doubt that the mischievous robes of the wrong consent has not applied.
The process then moved to the shut-locked court to see video evidence from the alleged victim that has been recorded in 2024.
The process is due to run for three days prior to Judge William Eveerson.
If you or someone you know support, you can contact the national sex assault, a service domestic violence and family on 1800repect (1800 737 732).
It does