51-year-old Sandys man who is also charged with incest.

Defence lawyer Mr. Archie Warner, in a one and a half hour summation, told the jury that rape was an easy crime to allege but a hard one to defend.

"Any rape case is emotional,'' he said, "but this case also involves incest and that makes it more repulsive.

Mr. Warner also told the jury that the complainant was not a credible witness and that her evidence should not be believed.

"There was no sperm in her vagina, though she and the defendant both said he ejaculated.

"This is consistent with the defendant's evidence of consent that the complainant gave him.

"Why didn't she escape? Why didn't she complain? She went to her neighbour's and told him her father just `screwed' her.

She even went back to the apartment.

"Why didn't she walk the short distance up the road to the Somerset Police Station?'' Mr. Warner asked. "Why did she go all the way to the Hamilton Police Station? "Are these the actions of a woman who has just been defiled, injured and upset? "She's a liar. She's not to be believed.'' But Crown Counsel Mr. Stephen Harrison told the jury that it was legally possible for a rape to have occurred even though there were no physical signs of struggle.

"The question you have to decide,'' he told the jury, "is what exactly is an appropriate response in a case like this.

"It is difficult to bring a charge of rape,'' he asked. "There are physical exams and the telling of personal details in public.

"Just because a woman is experienced sexually does not render that woman less believable or credible.

"Just because a woman may be involved in a sexual relationship does not mean she is incapable of withdrawing her consent at any given time,'' he said.

The charges stem from an alleged rape that is reported to have taken place during the early morning hours of February 15, 1992.

The trial continues todaya.