Twelve jurors spoke with a single voice yesterday as they handed down a verdict of guilty in a serious sexual assault trial in Supreme Court.

The seven-woman, five-man jury was out for just over an hour before arriving at the unanimous decision to convict Scott Francis Martin.

The 35-year-old Warwick man was found guilty of attacking a 29-year-old English woman on October 14 of last year.

He is expected to be sentenced next Thursday. The maximum penalty for serious sexual assault is 30 years imprisonment.

During the trial, the young accountant told the court of the attack which occurred shortly after she was tossed out of a taxi at 3 a.m. following a night out with work colleagues.

The woman told the court that after taxi driver Kenneth Bourne threw her out of his taxi for eating, a man she identified as Martin approached the taxi as she argued with the driver.

The same man later offered her a ride home and although she initially refused she eventually accepted the ride because she faced a three mile walk.

When Martin failed to follow her directions, she told the jury she jumped off the bike and resumed walking home.

But minutes later she was grabbed from behind and brutally sexually assaulted at a dark, secluded spot on Heron's Nest Drive in Southampton.

Police officer Michael Desilva found the woman after the attack, curled up in a foetal position on the side of the road.

During the trail Martin admitted he was the man who approached the woman as she argued with the taxi driver but said his only intention had been to help her.

He claimed he last saw her talking to another man on a bike.

However, a ball cap found at the scene of crime tied Martin to the attack.

Two forensic DNA experts from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police testified the DNA profile from hairs found in the hat matched DNA from butts of cigarettes smoked by Martin while he was in Police custody.

The jury heard that the chance of a random individual matching that DNA profile would be one in 190 million.

Acting Puisne Judge Charles-Etta Simmons presided over the case which was prosecuted by Vinette Graham-Allen and Graveney Bannister.

Yesterday morning she advised the jury on the legal points related to the case and summarised the evidence.

She told the jury the issue of credibility would be central to their decision and they had to determine whether the victim or Martin was the more credible witness.

Justice Simmons told the jurors they should consider whether other evidence supported the victim's identification of Martin.

"The DNA is capable of confirming the identification if you look at it in light of other evidence at hand," she said.

But she also said it was possible that an individual related to Martin might have also matched the DNA profile, and come onto the scene after Martin's admitted involvement in the taxi dispute, and then sexually assaulted the woman.

"Remember the timeline," she said. But she added it was a matter for the jurors "because it is your function to draw the conclusion".

After the jury came back with its decision, Martin's defence attorney Elizabeth Christopher said an appeal in this case was certain.

"We feel there has been misdirection on vital areas of the law," she said. "If they'd been given proper directions with respect to the DNA ... and proper directions regarding identification, I feel the jury would have acquitted."

Inside: Attack survivor tells her story Taxi driver under review by licensing board

See Page 2