A Central Otago man has decided not to give evidence in his trial on multiple charges of sexually abusing four young girls almost 20 years ago.
The 61-year-old man denies all allegations of sexually abusing the four girls, mainly between July 1999 and early 2006, but with one allegation of indecent offending against the third complainant between March 2008 and June 2010.
The Crown completed its case in the Dunedin District Court yesterday, the last of its witnesses being the man's wife, who was also the first witness when the trial began last week.
She returned to court yesterday to be questioned by defence counsel Bill Dawkins.
At the conclusion of the woman's evidence, Mr Dawkins told Judge Michael Crosbie and the jury the defendant was not giving evidence himself or calling any witnesses.
The Crown and defence then spent until mid-afternoon discussing legal questions relating to the case.
Following those discussions, a legislative issue meant Crown counsel Robin Bates asking for one charge of indecent assault relating to the third complainant, then a girl under 12, to be withdrawn. Judge Crosbie told the jurors that was because the specific charge of indecency with a girl under 12 was no longer a criminal offence as the particular offence had been repealed by Parliament.
The Crown could not rule out the possibility the offending against that complainant happened after May 19, 2005, ``in which case it couldn't have been an offence, as a matter of law''.
Two other charges alleging sexual violation by rape and by digital penetration of the same complainant were amended to extend the date range. The offending was originally said to have happened between June 30, 2002, and May 19, 2005, but the latter date was extended to February 2, 2006, to take into account the girl's 10th birthday.
At the start of the hearing a week ago, the man was facing 12 charges alleging rape, unlawful sexual connection and indecent assault. The removal last week of two representative charges of indecent assault relating to the first complainant, and the removal of the indecent assault charge withdrawn yesterday, has reduced the number of charges charges to nine.
And a charge of sexually violating one complainant by having unlawful sexual connection was amended to a charge of doing an indecent act.
In their evidence last week, the four complainants detailed various sexual offences they say the man committed against them.
The complainants said the offending happened late at night when the man's wife was at work but the woman said she seldom worked later than 9pm, although sometimes it was as late as 11pm.
The jury also heard evidence the man played adult pornography for the four girls and that two of them found a camera hidden in the family bathroom, directed towards the shower area.
When one of the girls told the man's wife about the camera, the woman said it was there so the man could watch her.
She was embarrassed when the girl told her because she had forgotten to remove it from the bathroom, she said yesterday.
Sometimes she and her husband would watch adult pornography they had on their home computer or sex movies on a television before they had sex.
She agreed they had a video camera with a tripod in one of the bedrooms and would sometimes use it to watch each other on screen during sex. They were not recording it. They just liked to watch, she said.
The Crown and defence will put their closing arguments to the jury today, before Judge Crosbie sums up the case either later today or tomorrow morning.
