An alleged rapist's behaviour to women at a brothel is one of the key reasons the jury should reject his version of events, a prosecutor has argued.
Joseph Ayoub is on trial after pleading not guilty to four charges of sexual intercourse without consent and one count each of inflicting actual bodily harm with intent to engage in sexual intercourse, choking, and assault.
It is alleged Ayoub agreed to a standard booking on a morning in September 2020 which included a massage, oral sex and penetrative sex with the complainant.
Upon entering the room with the complainant, it is alleged he refused to undergo a sexual health check or wear a condom which is part of the Mitchell brothel's policy.
The complainant and Ayoub exited the room the first time before entering again, when the accused is alleged to have slammed the sex worker against the wall and floor, digitally penetrate them, force oral sex, penile-vaginal sex, choke them and spit in their mouth without consent.
During closing arguments on Monday, prosecutor Morgan Howe addressed the jury and explained why Ayoub's evidence should be rejected while the complainant's should be accepted.
One of Mr Howe's reasons was how Ayoub engaged with women shown in CCTV footage and that should carry a reasonable belief it continued in the bedroom.
"The accused's attitude was that he could touch women in any way that he pleased," Mr Howe said, referring to examples of Ayoub touching the complainant's breasts and bottom, kissing the receptionist's neck while he was naked and pulling on the arm of another worker.
Mr Howe said these matters in isolation may not seem to matter but when together it is "rather telling about the accused's state of mind on that particular morning".
The way Ayoub told his story was also compared to how the complainant gave their evidence, as the latter retold events in "a narrative form" and weren't "searching for answers" when explaining what allegedly happened.
Meanwhile, Mr Howe referred to Ayoub's evidence giving the impression he was "trying to construct events" such as denying he called the complainant fat and when caught out he was "quick to try and proffer" those events rather than "make a concession".
Defence barrister John Purnell SC in his closing remarks on Monday and Tuesday included him describing Ayoub as an experienced brothel user compared to the complainant who had only worked three or four shifts before the alleged assault.
Mr Purnell said the complainant answered questions with "I don't know" or "I can't remember" 89 times when he cross examined them and their "complaints grow in magnitude and scope as time passes".
The defence lawyer said the complaint's demeanour could "only be described as bizarre and unimpressive" as they requested breaks almost every five minutes during cross-examination.
Mr Purnell also said the brothel's receptionist describing Ayoub and the complainant "hustling meant the alleged victim was aware of the services offered to Ayoub.
"The hustling means the girls are trying to get extra dough from the client," Mr Purnell said.
Justice David Mossop gave directions to the jury before they began deliberations on Tuesday afternoon. Ayoub had been supported in court by family members. The jury will continue their deliberations on Wednesday. The trial started on October 4.
