a charge of sexual assault yesterday.

After hearing Acting Puisne Judge Archibald Warner's lengthy summation of the evidence and direction of the key legal points involved, the seven-man five-woman jury came back into the courtroom just after lunchtime yesterday and announced a unanimous not guilty verdict.

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had been accused of commandeering the complainant's car after a night of drinking and dancing in May last year.

Against her wishes he allegedly drove them to Ducking Stool Park where he forced her to have sex with him.

As only two witnesses to the incident gave evidence -- the defendant and his accuser -- and no physical evidence of a rape or struggle was presented, the case hinged on whose story the jury believed.

Both witnesses testified that sexual intercourse had occurred between them.

The defendant said it was planned and consensual -- an assertion the complainant strongly denied.

In his summing up to the jury, Mr. Justice Warner said that they had only to determine whether the sex was consensual. But that determination would hinge on their assessment of the witnesses' credibility.

The woman had testified that she had begged him to stop the car several times and once they arrived at Ducking Stool Park, a struggle occurred which ended with him successfully forcing her to have sex.

She said that at one point she felt helpless and asked him to at least use a condom.

The jury was asked to disregard her testimony that she had told her boyfriend what had happened, because testimony of a report made did not necessarily mean it was true.

Jury acquits in rape trial Mr. Justice Warner also told the jury : "The fact that she is the complainant -- the alleged victim -- in no way makes her special when compared with the other witnesses... Her evidence must be carefully examined and analysed like each and every other witness.'' The defendant had testified, contrary to the complainant's story, that he had socialised with the woman and her friend that night and bought them both drinks.

He also denied the woman's claim that he had been in the ladies bathroom at Champion's nightclub that night.

In the end, Mr. Justice Warner said the complainant's defence is that sex between the two was consensual and it was for the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that the complainant did not consent to the sexual activity.

"If you are satisfied so that you feel sure that the defendant knew that the complainant was not consenting... then it is your duty to convict the defendant,'' he said.

"If you are not satisfied so that you feel sure... then you must find the defendant not guilty.'' "It's been a long ordeal for him,'' said defence counsel Richard Horseman minutes after the verdict was read.

"It's been hanging over his head for a while. He's glad to put it behind him and get on with his life.'' Prosecutor Charmaine Smith declined to comment.