Navy lieutenant facing rape charges scrutinised over memory of 'unremarkable' night

Warning: This story contains sexual assault allegations.A navy lieutenant facing three rape charges has been asked why his memory of the night is so clear if nothing remarkable happened.The lieutenant is before the court martial at Auckland's Devonport Naval Base this week, after a woman he dated while deployed overseas alleged he tried three times to have unprotected sex with her against her wishes in September last year.The lieutenant has pleaded not guilty to all charges, and argues the complainant made up the allegations out of jealousy after their brief relationship ended.Cross examining the lieutenant, prosecutor Sam McMullan questioned his story, suggesting it had been rehearsed in the months leading up to the court martial."Have you done a bit of prep for the trial?" McMullan asked.The lieutenant agreed."How many times did you read your evidence?" he continued."More than once, I haven't kept count," the lieutenant replied."Could be half a dozen, or a dozen?" McMullan pressed."Could be," the lieutenant said.McMullan questioned whether the lieutenant's evidence was truly based on his memory, or just what was written down."The document is based on my memory," the lieutenant said."You seem to have an extremely clear memory of that night," McMullan continued."This was a night that was otherwise fairly unremarkable. But you remember the names of two of the bars you went to, the beach you went to the next day, is that really what a person remembers a year on?"The lieutenant replied: "I've known about these allegations for nine months and I have had a lot of time to reflect on that night."McMullan pressed him directly."If it was based on your recollection, wouldn't you remember putting your penis inside of her vagina three times without consent?" he asked."You'd recall at the point in time you put your penis in her vagina that she hadn't given her consent.""I don't recall that because I never put my penis inside her vagina that night," the lieutenant said.The next witness, the complainant's roommate during the hotel stay, was called to give evidence by the defence - surprising the prosecution."You said you were not available to be a witness for the prosecution," McMullan said."Is the reason why you decided not to appear for the prosecution because you've picked a side?""I didn't want to support a side I don't believe in," the roommate said.The roommate did not know either the defendant or complainant before the events in September and hadn't kept up with them afterwards.Defence lawyer Asta Gold asked her to describe the complainant's demeanour after the night in which she alleged she had been raped."[The mood between the complainant and defendant was] normal, as normal as it was the night before," she said.Later that day, the complainant and defendant had consensual sex with a condom.The roommate recalled the complainant being excited at the time."What was her mood like when she said she was going to see [the defendant]?" Gold asked her."Happy, like she was looking forward to hanging out with [him]."During cross examination, McMullan questioned the roommate's memory."When you gave a statement to military police, could you remember the defendant's name?" he asked."I believe so," she replied."Paragraph 17: 'I can't recall his name'," McMullan read."I believe I just needed my memory jogged," the roommate said."So, it's all come flooding back after you've had another nine months to think about it?" McMullan asked."It was a trip, I had fun, I moved on with my life, so when I was called in January [to give a statement] I hadn't thought about it that much, but once I was called in, it was impactful, so I went through my memory," she said."You're just here to give evidence that is most favourable to [the defendant], aren't you?" he continued."No, I'm here to give evidence of what I saw," she said.