A lady informed an authorities investigator her Tinder go out ready a “trap” on her behalf, taking their to a Wellington resorts and raping her as she slept.

Nevertheless rape accused’s lawyer mentioned their customer is a “gentleman”, which never ever enticed the lady toward lodge.

Wellington people Amitesh Kumar pleaded not liable on Monday to 1 fee of sexual violation by rape.

The top stated Kumar recommended the woman to “drink quicker” after fulfilling this lady inside city in March 2015.

The woman have relocated to brand-new Zealand from abroad immediately before complimentary with Kumar regarding app.

The pair replaced emails for approximately six time before conference within waterfront and going for a drive, going to the South Coast, next an inner-city pub and resort.

Pablo Hamber? and Matthew Ferrier came out as lawyers your Crown.

Hamber said Kumar drove the automobile, providing the complainant alcoholic beverages, and “encouraged the lady to drink it rapidly”.

The complainant mentioned she afterwards forgotten consciousness.

Hamber mentioned the woman came to, and asked Kumar if he had got sex with her, but ended up being informed he had perhaps not.

Texts exchanged afterward suggested otherwise, and a medical exam found semen, with what Hamber called an “extremely strong” link to Kumar’s DNA.

“We got outside of the car and sat someplace from the sea,” the complainant told a detective in an interview starred towards the judge.

“the guy mentioned that he likes my personal lip area. I advised your very, very plainly that I’m not interested in kissing.”

She said Kumar expected if she know many people in unique Zealand, or anybody whom could help her in an emergency.

She remembered moving at a pub prior to going for the lodge.

From the resort, she at some time receive herself during intercourse with Kumar.

“I happened to be nude. He had been near, I was horrified. I inquired your ‘Do you do just about anything?'”

“ANYTHING TRULY WENT INCORRECT”

The complainant said she realized “things truly moved incorrect” and later begun sobbing.

She believed the Tinder big date is “a pitfall merely to have actually sex”, and suspected certainly this lady products from the pub was actually spiked.

But protection lawyer Karun Lakshman? advised the jury: “this is simply not an instance where the defendant got enticed the complainant into dating him”.

The guy said the pair agreed to see and go out “for a personal night” which lasted more than Kumar predicted.

By about 11.30pm both comprise experiencing intoxicated, and Kumar wouldn’t like to push room drunk from the urban area.

Lakshman stated the lady desired to drink much more although set couldn’t have more liquor thus made a decision to sleep for some time “sober up if you like” prior to going her split steps.

“the guy don’t force this lady to drink”.

The guy stated there is no dispute the intercourse work were held but Kumar mentioned it had been consensual.

Kumar mentioned the guy seemed to recall the complainant in addition to your.

The woman questioned Kumar if she demanded an urgent situation contraceptive.

Kumar informed police afterwards he would not bear in mind having sexual intercourse, but did not believe he previously done so.

“that is not a denial, it is just stating, ‘in so far as i can bear in mind absolutely nothing took place’.”

During cross-examination, Lakshman advised it had been possible during drive Kumar drank equally as much once the lady four RTD-type cans.

The demo at Wellington area courtroom was before Judge Ian factory and a jury of seven people and five ladies.

It’s likely to endure at least three days.