including five counts of burglary and one of arson, yesterday dismissed his defence as a complete lie.

On the eleventh day of the trial of Arnett Dill, attorney Patrick Doherty, in his summing up to the jury, claimed that a mountain of evidence had been built against the accused while his own version of events was full of inconsistencies.

Dill is charged with five counts of breaking and entering, five counts of receiving stolen goods, two counts of wilful damage and one count of arson.

The crimes were committed on various stores last Christmas and netted the culprits more than $80,000 worth of goods, including jewellery and electrical equipment. Dill's co-accused, John Jefferis, is now in prison after confessing to three of the burglaries.

"One of the defence's arguments is that Mr. Dill was not there during the break-ins and that his cousin John Jefferis is responsible -- that came as a surprise to me,'' Mr. Doherty said.

Mr. Doherty then listed the stack of evidence that linked Dill to the crime, including the fact that they were all committed by the same people, Dill's fingerprints were found on one of the stolen items and the fact that the haul was discovered in Dill's office, car and father's home.

He went on to tear Dill's own version of events to pieces, saying that his alibi was inconsistent.

"When he did take to the stand and gave evidence I am going to suggest to you that, on most points he was evasive, he wasn't truthful and he was not trying to assist you,'' Mr. Doherty said.

"He's basically all over the place, trying to come up with explanations and at the end of the day he doesn't know.'' Wrapping up the defence's case, lawyer Peter Farge told the jury that there was no evidence that clearly proved that Dill was at any of the premises broken into.

"It could have been that Jefferis was responsible all the time,'' he said.

The jury is expected to return its verdict tomorrow.