A woman who claims she was raped by NRL star Jack de Belin has bitten back at a line of questioning from his barrister.
WARNING: Graphic content
A woman has tearfully rejected NRL star Jack de Belin’s version of events inside the North Wollongong unit where she claims he raped her, telling a court “nothing was consensual that night”.
The St George Illawarra Dragons forward and Callan Sinclair stand accused of sexually assaulting the woman, then 19, after the trio met at Wollongong’s popular Mr Crown bar in December 2018.
Their District Court trial has been told of allegations from the woman that she felt “dead inside” and was crying as the men swapped positions forcing vaginal, oral and anal sex on her at a North Wollongong unit.
Mr de Belin, 30, and Mr Sinclair, 24, have both pleaded not guilty to five counts of aggravated sexual assault and maintain the encounter with the woman was consensual.
On Monday, the fourth day of the trial, the jury continued to watch prerecorded evidence the woman gave during the men’s last trial in November that could not be concluded.
The court has previously heard allegations the woman was directed into an ensuite in the unit rented by Mr de Belin’s cousin when the footballer walked in on her naked to have a shower.
She claimed she ran out of the bathroom before a still-naked Mr de Belin came up behind her, untied her shirt before shoving her onto the bed and stripping her pants off.
He allegedly then grabbed her by the neck, pinned her down with his forearm and began non-consensual sex with the woman, who claims she said “No” before Mr Sinclair undressed and joined in.
During the woman’s cross-examination, Mr de Belin’s barrister David Campbell SC put to her a different version of events inside the bedroom that painted a picture of a rigorous but consensual encounter.
Mr Campbell put to the woman that his client waited for her to leave the bathroom before he went in for a shower and emerged to find her kissing Mr Sinclair in the bedroom.
He suggested Mr de Belin, wearing a towel around his waist, walked over to them.
The woman denied this and claimed she clearly remembered feeling Mr de Belin’s “wet body on my back” when he allegedly came up behind her.
Mr Campbell suggested that the woman removed her own top and the two men kissed her breasts before she positioned herself on the bed and Mr de Belin removed her pants.
Mr Campbell put to the woman at that point another man came to the door, prompting her to ask “Jack, who’s that?” before Mr de Belin left the room to talk to the man.
“I’m putting to you this version of events is true and correct?” he said.
She replied: “No, they’re false.”
Mr Campbell put to her that when Mr de Belin returned, he performed consensual oral sex on the woman before beginning consensual penile-vaginal sex with her.
Mr Sinclair then removed his clothes before joining the others on the bed where he and Mr de Belin swapped positions having oral and vaginal sex with the woman, Mr Campbell said.
“Nothing was consensual that night,” she repeated in reply to Mr Campbell’s suggestions.
Mr Campbell put to her that she never said “no” or “stop” during the incident, which she denied. He then asked her how loudly she spoke.
“I don’t remember how loud my voice was. Nobody was listening to me,” she said.
Earlier, during her cross-examination, the woman snapped at a line of questions about her conversation with a friend the day after the incident.
She repeated, “I do not remember, it was two years ago” as Mr Campbell probed her about a chat he said she had with a work colleague on December 9, 2018, before the woman became emotional and asked for a break.
“All that matters is what happened in that unit,” she said. “What happened in that unit happened in that unit, and that’s what we’re here about.”
Mr Campbell put to the woman that she had lied when telling police she had never spoken with the friend, saying her answers in court were “completely different” to her police statement.
The woman said any omissions in the statement about events and conversations she shared with others on the night of the incident and the next day could be a result of shock.
“My brain was working to the best of its ability in the shock and trauma I’ve just been through,” she said.
“I have not lied about anything.”
Mr Campbell later played CCTV footage of the woman on the dancefloor with Mr de Belin and Mr Sinclair, claiming it showed her “looking very fondly” into his client’s eyes.
She replied: “I don’t remember. I was a 19-year-old girl, I’m allowed to go out and have a good dance”.
In the footage she could be seen hugging Mr de Belin before dancing near him and taking a hat from his head.
Mr Campbell put to her, at one point, it appeared she was “certainly looking affectionately toward the facial area of Mr de Belin”.
The woman said she could not remember, saying it was clear she was smiling in the footage, but her eyes might have been closed.
Mr Campbell also suggested that a “v-signal” – symbolising oral sex – the trial has previously heard she made in the direction of Mr Sinclair was also directed at Mr de Belin.
“It was two years ago, I don’t know who it was directed at. It could have been directed at the wall,” the woman replied.
The trial continues before Judge Nicole Noman.