admitted it was possible he could be the woman's father.

Crown Counsel Mr. Stephen Harrison asked the defendant why he still denied being the woman's father, pointing out that experts had earlier testified that blood and DNA tests showed that there was a high probability that he was the father.

"I accept that I could be her father,'' he said. "But I still have my doubts.

"She (the mother) should have told me that that was my daughter. It would be wicked for a man to go with his own child.

"I'm not a scientist,'' he said. "I have to go by my gut feelings. "I had a belief she could be mine, but I did not know that she was mine. I have 10 children and I know they are all mine.

"Sir, if you have any children you know when they are yours. There's a bond and I haven't had that with her.'' The offence is alleged to have occurred on February 15, 1992. At that time the defendant was sharing his one-bedroom apartment with the woman.

She came home around 4 a.m and said that after a brief conversation with the defendant she undressed and fell asleep on a chair in the living room. The defendant was asleep on the floor.

The 25-year-old woman told the court she was awakened by the defendant who was rubbing his hands between her legs. She said he put his hand around her neck and pulled her to the floor where they had sex without her consent.

The man, who never denied that he had sex with his alleged daughter, told the court he was concerned about her lifestyle.

"I approached her about her promiscuity. I told her that the way she was going she might as well give me some.'' Mr. Harrison asked him why he felt having sex with the woman was going to help her be less promiscuous.

"I'm going to suggest to you,'' Mr. Harrison said, "that your approach to helping your alleged daughter was self-serving and not past your own sexual habits.'' "I'm a man, she's a woman,'' the man said. "I have desires, she has desires.

She's got her own life.'' Earlier, the man testified that he had introduced the woman as his daughter to two of his sons. He admitted to giving her casual financial support though he was adamant that he was never satisfied she was his child.

He said he was convinced she was not his child after she had a baby with the same man whom he believes broke up his (defendant's) marriage.

"I came to that conclusion after I found out what she had done. I knew then that any child of mine would not go with any man who had done this to me,'' he said.

The trial continues this morning.