victim in a sexual exploitation trial wrapped up this week.

Defence attorney Liz Christopher had asked her about her two older sons' guests who stayed at her home during the same time-period that the girl was allegedly exploited by the 31-year-old St. George's man who is on trial.

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is accused of fondling the girl, who knew him, on three occasions when she was six years old.

The court heard that the girl's two step brothers -- aged 16 and 19 -- each had guests of similar ages staying at the house during the summer of 2000.

Ms Christopher also asked the mother whether she remembered the accused having a bald head that summer. The mother said she did and that at some point that summer he had his hair completely shaved off.

The accused man currently has thinning hair.

Ms Christopher also asked the mother whether she had pornographic videos in her bedroom.

Crown counsel Juan Wolffe questioned the relevance of this question and Ms Christopher argued that it went to how the girl might have sexual knowledge.

It was the latest in a series of legal arguments which have disjointed proceedings and caused the child's mother to be sent out of the courtroom on three occasions.

Acting Magistrate Justin Williams decided to allow the line of questioning.

"No, I have no pornographic videos but I do have adult content videos,'' said the mother. Asked to explain the distinction she replied: "These have a medical doctor on the front (who) explains the content of the video and the contents of each section.'' "Do any of these videos contain matters of a sexual nature while the people are unclothed?'' asked Ms Christopher.

"Yes, they have adult content for viewing for only adults,'' said the girl's mother.

The mother had testified that the girl exhibited unusual behaviour around the time of the alleged assaults. She said she was whiny and demanding of attention.

Ms Christopher challenged the mother on these statements asking whether the girl might have been whiny because she did not regularly eat breakfast.

She also asked about a questionnaire the mother had filled out when she originally took the girl to see a child psychiatrist.

In it she indicated that the child was not angry and did not have trouble sleeping.

Under re-examination however, Mr. Wolffe asked the mother when she had seen the child waking up irregularly. The mother said the girl awoke around 2 a.m.

and would be "upset''.

The girl's mother was followed in the witness box by P.c. Marlo Santiago.

The primary purpose of P.c. Santiago's testimony was to introduce into evidence audio and videotapes Police made with the girl after the alleged assault.

P.c. Santiago testified that she made tapes of her own interviews with the girl on September 11 and 12 of 2000. She also said that she transcribed these tapes between October 30 and November 3 of that year.

The trial continues today and is unlikely to finish until next week.