A lawyer defending a man accused of raping his cousin yesterday questioned why she moved back in with the alleged attacker months after the incident.

The 29-year-old man is accused of attacking the woman in his bedroom in December, 2001 but lawyer Craig Attridge said she had quite happily moved back in February, 2002.

He asked the jury during his closing address in the Supreme Court: ?Would you move back into your rapist?s house when you have an alternative? She had ten uncles and aunts on the Island and a granny she always stayed with.

?She must have had other options.?

The alleged victim, a 28-year-old former Middle School teacher, had lived with the accused and his parents in December, 2001 after moving back to Bermuda from overseas to work.

But Mr. Attridge questioned why she had waited 11 months before telling Police of the alleged incident.

?Was this motivated by malice?? he asked. ?The complainant had an altercation with the mother. Maybe she?s trying to get back at that mum by using him.?

The defendant said he had fallen asleep next to his cousin on his bed and then rolled onto her, but has denied any sexual contact.

Mr. Attridge said: ?This case is really about a misconceived incident between two young people who had drunk three quarters of a bottle of rum.

?It?s about a compromising incident, that with dislike, distrust and malice has been erroneously exaggerated into a sexual assault.?

He said the complainant had drunk as much of the rum as the defendant.

She told the court said she woke to find her breast exposed and the defendant thrusting inside her, but Mr. Attridge questioned how he could have done all that without waking her up.

?Did she, in her half drunken state, the worse for drink, freak out and mistake what took place??

However, Prosecutor Graveney Bannister said the man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had plotted to rape the woman when his parents were out.

?Why would he turn off the light and lock the door? It was all calculated. He intended to sexually assault her.?

He questioned why he had written a letter of contrition to her apologising for what had happened if it had been so innocent.

?Why, if he was just rolling on a futon and touched her? Use your common sense, why would one apologise so profusely??

He said the woman had cried real tears of anguish in the witness box and questioned why she would make up a tale of sexual assault.

?Why would a school teacher speak to the Police and make a statement of an embarrassing personal nature and provide detail?? he asked.

?Why come all the way from Canada to say the accused had sexually assaulted her??

He said the delay in making the complaint to the Police had been because she lived overseas, although she had spoken about the incident to her parents the day it happened.

Assistant Supreme Court Justice Carlisle Greaves is scheduled to sum up the case today and then send the jury out to deliver its verdict.