An HIV-positive man had unprotected sex with his girlfriend nine times before he told her about his condition, a Supreme Court jury heard yesterday.

But the woman also admitted she continued to continued to have sex with him ? this time using a condom ? before reporting him to the Police.

The 43-year-old Smith?s Parish man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, denies exposing the 38-year-old woman to HIV ? which is also considered to be a serious sexual assault ? nine times between October 23 to November 5, 2003.

The complainant, from Sandys, gave evidence when the trial opened yesterday.

?Did he tell you he had HIV before you had sex with him?? Crown counsel Graveney Bannister asked her.

?No he did not,? she told the eight-woman, four-man jury.

She also said that on October 28, 2003 she helped him ?fill out a medical form that consisted of headed questions and yes and no boxes?.

?I asked the questions,? she said. ?Most of them he answered no to. He said no to HIV. I ticked the boxes?.

She said she believed he was telling her the truth.

More than a week later, on November 8, he told her he was HIV positive.

?I asked him why he could not tell me before and he said he didn?t want me to hang around with him out of pity or shun him away,? she said.

After he told her about his illness, she had sex with him several times, leading up the day that she reported him to the Police.

?I had already been exposed nine times before. I figured I already had the HIV virus. I used a condom. The sex was nice,? she said.

On December 4, the complainant said that the man offered her a bribe to tell his probation officer that she knew he was having sex with an HIV-positive man the whole time.

She refused her lover?s request and reported him instead.

She said she remembered the dates when they had sex because she wrote them down in her calendar.

However, lawyer Victoria Pearman put it to the woman that she knew he was HIV positive and only told the Police because she wanted to get rid of him as a boyfriend.

?You had enough of him then?? Mr. Pearman asked.

She also said her client had been using condoms the whole time.

?I suggest to you that the reason you didn?t perform fellatio on him was because he was wearing a condom,? Ms Pearman said.

?No that?s not correct,? the victim said.

Ms Pearman also questioned why she did not report the accused on November 8, after his disclosure, but did so on December 4.

She asked her if she remembered him telling her: ?Don?t play around. This is serious business, It is a possibility that if I get in trouble I will get 30 years?.

The second witness was the accused?s doctor, Dr. Robert Martin, who testified the man had been HIV positive since May, 1988.

He said the victim was still at risk even though she used protection.

?There is some risk when a condom is used, if it is ruptured,? Dr. Martin said.

He said that he had only met with the accused twice, once for an injury and once for pneumonia that was ?partially associated with a diminished immune system (HIV)?.

But Dr. Martin agreed that during the relevant dates the man?s HIV levels were very low.

?But it does not mean that it cannot be transferred,? Dr. Martin said.

The trial continues today before Puisne Judge Ian Kawaley.