A 16-year-old boy told Supreme Court yesterday how he and two other teenagers had oral sex and full intercourse with an 11-year-old girl last year.

Mr. B, who was 15 at the time of the incident, was giving evidence in the Supreme Court trial of an older teenager, Mr. A, who stands accused of having unlawful carnal knowledge with an 11-year-old girl, Miss X.

Mr. B told court yesterday, that him, Mr. A and a 13-year-old boy all had oral sex and full intercourse with Miss X one after another on May 5. None of the parties can be named for legal reasons.

He also admitted under questioning by defence lawyer Elizabeth Christopher that he had already pleaded guilty to having unlawful carnal knowledge of Miss X, in another court to get a "better deal" for himself.

Mr. A denies having unlawful carnal knowledge of Miss X.

Yesterday Mr. B, told the jury he had been at Mr. A's house on the night of the alleged incident and heard Mr. A phone the girl and tell her to come over to Mr. A's house.

He told Supreme Court, that they were all outside when she came over and Mr. A went down in the cellar of his house with Miss X. He appeared about five minutes later telling the two other boys she gave him oral sex.

Mr. B then went down in the cellar and Miss X performed the same sex act and when he left the cellar the 13-year-old boy also went into the cellar with the girl, according to the 16-year-old.

It was after this sequence, Mr. B claimed, that Mr. A then went with the 11-year-old and had sex. He said: "They went around the house. They were there for a little while then he came back around. He said he had sex with her. Then I went around."

Mr. B also alleged that the 13-year-old went around the house with Miss X to have sex.

Ms Christopher, however, suggested to Mr. B that he had not given this evidence before his lawyer arranged a deal for him.

She also suggested that a fight about an unrelated matter, between the two boys meant they were no longer friends and that it was Mr. B, not the defendant who called the 11-year-old.

Mr. B agreed with the first two suggestions, but repeatedly denied the suggestion that it had been him and not Mr. A who had instigated the encounter with Miss X.

"I am going to suggest to you that you have put Mr. A in it to get a better deal for yourself," Ms. Christopher said.

The teen however denied this saying: "No definitely not."

On Thursday, last week, Miss X, who is now 12 and lived with her grandmother at the time of the incident, said in her testimony that she had told the boys: "no" before the sexual encounters.

She had explained that she had known Mr. A as a neighbour and Mr. B she had known for a couple of months before the incident. Miss X said she did not know the 13-year-old well.

Yesterday under cross examination, Ms. Christopher alleged that it was Miss X who had a crush on the defendant and that when he refused her advances she got upset.

She added: "I am going to suggest to you because you had a crush on (Mr. A), you were angry with him when he rejected you."

Miss X said: "He never rejected me."