A teenager who said she watched her 14-year-old friend be raped told Supreme Court yesterday she didn’t think about calling out for help.

A total of four defendants — aged between 19 and 21 — have denied a charge of serious sexual assault on July 27 of last year in connection with the incident.

One of the defendants has further denied supplying the victim with alcohol in order to use her for sexual purposes.

The victim told the court last week she was coerced by the men into drinking liquor in the back yard of one of the defendant’s homes.

She said she was subsequently raped by two of the accused, while an unnamed male not before the court forced her to perform oral sex.

Another teenager, a friend of the victim, testified on Tuesday that she witnessed the victim having sex with one defendant and performing oral sex on two others while crying.

Neither the defendants, the victim or her friend who witnessed the incident can be identified for legal reasons.

During her third day on the stand yesterday, the witness was again challenged by defence lawyer Richard Horseman about her version of events.

She told the court that after arriving at the home of one of one defendant (“A”), she saw his sister and mother, whom she knew.

However once the sexual assault allegedly began, she admitted that did not attempt to get the attention of either woman, explaining that she didn’t think to do so at the time.

Mr Horseman asked: “Didn’t you think that was the time to call 911? You say your friend is circled by all these guys.

“What are you doing? If all of this was happening, why didn’t you knock on the door?”

The witness responded: “I didn’t think to do that.”

Asked if she had tried to get the men off of the victim, she said she struck one of the defendants (“C”) in the shoulder, but he did not react.

Mr Horseman also challenged the witness about contradictions between the statement she gave to police and her testimony before the courts.

While she had told the court on Tuesday she saw defendant A have sex with the victim and the victim perform oral sex on defendants B and C, she told police that she saw another man have sex with her friend as well.

Questioned about the inconsistency, she said of her police statement: “That’s what I thought I saw, but now I remember. I was tired.”

Mr Horseman also questioned whether she saw the victim crying during the incident, suggesting the teenager only started crying after she returned to the main road to catch a bus because she didn’t want to be seen as a “ho”.

The lawyer also suggested that his client, defendant A, had left the yard just before the attack began and was actually at the main road when the witness left the property, a claim the witness said was untrue.

The witness also denied the suggestion that she had told a nurse in the hours following the attack that she had been held back by the men during the incident, or that someone had attempted to sexually assault her that evening.

The trial continues in Supreme Court today.