Loading
To determine the offence of sexual touching, prosecutors should show Beale knew the lady was not consenting or was reckless as to her consent. Tunks stated it was “extra probably” the latter.
“He simply did what he felt like doing, and continued, it doesn’t matter what,” he stated.
The prosecutor stated the actual fact Beale was intoxicated was not one thing to be taken into consideration.
The girl described the touching as lasting “perhaps a second and a half, like one Mississippi”, and stated Beale had touched naked pores and skin.
Loading
Requested throughout cross-examination whether or not her outfit was “as quick as could be” on her, the lady stated it was “quick sufficient that should you have been to the touch my bum, you may seize naked pores and skin”.
Tunks invited the jury to conclude the complainant had been “staunchly constant” in her proof that she didn’t consent to sexual exercise with Beale.
He stated the jury may need discovered the lady to have had a “considerably defiant” or “combative” tone, notably throughout cross-examination.
“Whether or not or not you discovered her proof or manner to be interesting or likeable just isn’t the purpose,” he stated.
He famous she had sat in a room stuffed with strangers and divulged “extraordinarily personal and delicate points of her private life”.
Beale’s barrister Margaret Cunneen, SC, beforehand instructed the jury that in the event that they weren’t glad past affordable doubt the lady was an sincere and correct witness, in relation to her account, “you may by no means discover Kurtley Beale responsible”.
Cunneen is because of ship her closing handle on Thursday, earlier than deliberations are estimated to begin on Friday.
With AAP