A man has denied telling his ex-girlfriend his friend was videotaping as he raped her at knifepoint.

Pleading his innocence yesterday claiming the sex was consensual the defendant said, if he had a tape, he would have brought it to court to prove this.

The 37-year-old has been accused by the woman of attempting to rape her in her own home, and then actually raping her there three weeks later. She told Supreme Court in evidence earlier this week that he stole $40 from her during the first incident as well as inflicting bruises on her and biting her.

She further claimed the man raped her at knifepoint on the second occasion her birthday before robbing her of $500 and driving his car into her legs. She said after this, he sent her two intimidating letters from Westgate while he was there on remand after being charged over the allegations.

Giving her version of what happened during the second incident, the woman told the court: "I was terrified. He had a knife in his hand. He told me 'don't make a f*****g noise' because he'll slit my throat." She also told the jury the man's phone rang, and he had a conversation with his friend before raping her.

"He told me to make it look like I was enjoying it. I was frightened. I didn't know what to do. After raping me he got up off the bed, went to the kitchen to get a towel and he pushed me back on the bed. He told me: 'Surprise! you're on candid camera.' He said his friend was taping the whole thing," she claimed.

Neither she nor the defendant can be identified for legal reasons. The man has pleaded not guilty to a string of charges in relation to the allegations.

In his evidence earlier this week, he claimed he was invited into the woman's home on both occasions despite the fact she had a restraining order against him. He told the jury there was no sexual encounter on the first occasion, and consensual sex on the second occasion after the woman agreed to drop charges over the first incident.

Cross-examining the man yesterday, Senior Crown counsel Carrington Mahoney put it to him that the real reason he went to the woman's home on the second occasion was to pressure her into doing so.

"All this thing about 'surprise candid camera', was all part and parcel of your attempt to intimidate her to drop the charges," said Mr. Mahoney.

The defendant replied: "If I had a videotape, it would be in court today. If I had intended to videotape, I would have gone ahead and done it and brought it to court today."

Mr. Mahoney then asked: "You are aware of the importance of videotaping for things like this?"

The man responded: "It's proof of whatever it is."

The prosecutor also put it to him that when he went to the woman's house on the second occasion he breached an order of Magistrate Khamisi Tokunbo not to contact her a condition of bail over the first allegations. The man agreed, but claimed he only reacted to the woman calling and inviting him over to discuss the situation.

Asked about allegations that he made three phone calls to the complainant from the Police station after his arrest over the first incident, asking why she was doing this to him, the man said he made two phone calls, after he had first called his lawyer.

The case continues.