A man accused of seriously sexually assaulting his estranged wife denied holding a knife to her throat while forcing her to strip, Supreme Court heard yesterday.

The 34-year-old man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, admitted that he slapped his wife, and claimed to have had consensual sex with her twice, but said at no point did he threaten her with a kitchen knife.

During cross examination, he denied leading his wife up stairs to her bedroom as he held the knife on her bare back.

And he said he did not take the knife from the kitchen, as claimed by the prosecution, and claimed that he and his wife had gone to the bedroom together willingly.

Prosecutor Vinette Graham-Allen suggested to the court that after the couple arrived in the bedroom, the accused threatened his wife with the knife and then ordered her to masturbate while he undressed.

He denied putting the knife on the dresser before allegedly raping her. The man told the court that she had been a willing partner in the sex and that she had enjoyed it.

The Somerset man has denied seriously sexually assaulting his wife and causing her grievous bodily harm on March 12 of last year.

Prosecutors Ms Graham-Allen and Cindy Clark have alleged during the course of the trial that the man threatened the woman with a knife, punched her in the head repeatedly, and then sexually assaulted her after she told him that a trip she was planning to New York was none of his business.

Ms Graham-Allen suggested to the five woman, seven man jury that the 28-year-old wife was of small build, weighing only 112 pounds, and that her husband had used his Aikido training to knock her to the floor.

However, the accused denied all of it and said Aikido - although a martial art - was peaceful.

He said that he only "slapped" his wife after she told him to mind his own business, but did not continue punching her after she had hit the floor.

"I tried to lift her up and get her to stop screaming," said the defendant.

But, Ms Graham-Allen suggested that he hit her because he thought he was losing "control of her movements" and that he did not expect that sort of response from her.

He said: "I slapped her because we were having a conversation and then she said that."

But Ms Graham-Allen suggested that he did control her movements because his wife had told the court earlier that he did not want her to see her three girlfriends. He denied that allegation, and he also strongly disagreed with a claim that he had previously hit his wife before the night in question.

But Ms Graham-Allen alleged that he had severely beaten his wife in her home in front of their two sons on March 8 - just four days before the alleged incident occurred.

He said: "That is incorrect."

He also denied Ms Graham-Allen's suggestion that he not only slapped the woman to the tile floor and repeatedly punched her, but that he also gripped her around the throat and lifted her off the floor before holding a serrated knife to her neck.

She said: "You told her to go into the living room and strip."

And she said when the woman tried to make a run for the door, her husband stopped her and ripped off her shirt, as he had told the court was customary in their marriage.

Ms Graham-Allen added: "But I believe I heard you say that you were both now leading your own lives - and you were living with a new woman."

Ms Graham-Allen asked why throughout the row and ensuing sex he had not noticed a deep cut to his wife's ear and other grazes and bruises, including a large blood clot on her forehead.

But he said he did not notice her ear until he was leaving the house, and said that although he had noticed the bruise on her neck, he did not know where or when she had received it.

The jury heard that after leaving his wife at the house, the defendant then telephoned twice to ask her how she was and each time was told that she was on the telephone to her brother. Later that evening, after he had arrived at a party with his colleagues at his job, he was arrested and led from the building in handcuffs.

Asked if he was embarrassed, he said: "No, I wasn't embarrassed. I was just in a state of shock."

Defence lawyer Mark Pettingill suggested that the accused was forced or coerced into giving a statement to the Police when he was in custody. Mr. Pettingill asked the accused why he had answered Police questions when his lawyer had advised him not to.

The defendant said: "Because they made it quite clear that my lawyer's advice was not proper advice and that I had to give evidence to aid the investigation. I followed procedures so that I could get out of that place."

But Ms Graham-Allen said that he had signed the statements and made additions to them.

The trial continues today before Assistant Justice Charles-Etta Simmons.