A Supreme Court jury was yesterday told to treat an alleged rape victim's evidence as like a scene from a Hollywood 'B' movie.

Rick Woolridge Jr., defending, was responding to remarks by Crown counsel Robert Welling, who told the jury the young woman was telling the truth because she had not exaggerated her account into a "Hollywood version of rape".

But Mr. Woolridge claimed the woman's evidence was "fabricated" because there were no signs of a struggle. He claimed the woman "concocted" the allegation of rape to cover up consensual sex and to win back her boyfriend, after arguing earlier that evening.

The 20-year-old defendant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, denies sexual assault. He is accused of raping the young woman in the driving seat of a car after a night out at Splash nightclub, in the early hours of March 31 last year.

The court heard that the victim sustained an injury in the form of a 1cm by 3cm abrasion.

Mr. Woolridge asked Dr. Basil Wilson, an expert in dealing with sexual trauma, whether such an injury could have been caused through consensual sex, to which he replied "Yes".

But Mr. Welling argued it would have to be inflicted "by more force". He said: "The 3cm by 1cm abrasion is a classic rape injury isn't it?"

Mr. Welling told the jury: "Why does she, if she's lying as the defence say, come up with a story that will inevitably be denied by the defendant, and which involves the Police and which results in her boyfriend discovering they've had sexual intercourse in a car?

"Why on Earth would she do that? She could have said absolutely anything, she could have said someone pulled a knife on her, or she'd had a big row with a friend and was left stranded that night. She could have said anything.

"If this is a young girl who is lying, I suggest she would have given to you the Hollywood version of rape and not the version given from the witness box.

"You would not expect someone who was raped to then drive their attacker home. The alleged victim to then say the attacker says to her afterwards 'Are you coming in then?'. That's not the Hollywood version, that is the version of a girl who has told the truth — that things don't always turn out the way you expect them to when you see films of women screaming, clothing torn. That is the fantasy and not the reality."

Mr. Welling argued the injury was "a classic rape trauma abrasion, entirely in keeping with an allegation of forced sex".

He said: "It's forced because the woman does not voluntarily tilt the pelvis to accommodate sex. She did not tilt her pelvis.

"What we have is a classic rape injury and the defendant's account from the witness box does not account for that injury.

"This is we say, the case of a young man who was drunk. A young man who thought she fancied him and thought all he had to say was 'I fancy you' and she'd be ready and willing, but he didn't like it when she didn't take him seriously.

"He showed her just how serious he was when he moved across, pulled down her pants and underwear with his hands and legs and subjected her to a sexual assault."

Mr. Woolridge however, claimed the abrasion could have been caused by the angle of a man above a woman sat in a driving seat. He claimed the woman's version of events was to cover up the sex to her boyfriend.

"She's got to go home with the smell of sex and with an abrasion she would have to explain to her boyfriend, so she's got to come up with a story, and we say this is her story," said Mr. Woolridge.

"I submit to you that what you did hear is the Hollywood version, the version which secures the sympathies of her boyfriend to overshadow whatever they were arguing about before. She needed to get his sympathies to get back in the door, and at the same time cover up that she'd had sex."

Mr. Woolridge dismissed the woman's evidence as "errant nonsense".

"There are no injuries, no signs of a struggle," he said. "We say this is because the sex was consensual, and the abrasion would have been caused by the angle of the sex to the seat in the car.

"We're not talking about tears and rips and bruising from holding down. It was fully consensual."

Mr. Woolridge said: "It's Hollywood of the classic 'B' movie and not your Hollywood blockbuster.

"This is a young lady who had consensual sex. She needed to get her boyfriend back because earlier that night he had thwarted her affections and she needed to hook him back. Nothing hooks someone back more than sympathy.

"This was not a man who was drunk. He had a couple of drinks. His mistake was that when he had consensual sex he thought it was somebody he could trust.

"Whatever motive she had for concocting this, it's a concoction, it's a fabrication."

The case resumes this morning.