Judge Lisa Preston began her final summing up of the case on Friday.

Yesterday she continued her speech, outlining the case for both prosecution and defence and speaking to the jury about the essential elements of the charges they had to consider.

She also took time to explain to the jurors what consent involves.

“Accepting a sexual act because of force … or the threat or fear of any force – that is not the same as consent,” she said.

“If a woman is asleep or unconscious at the time of sexual intercourse, it is not consent.

“If she is so intoxicated that she is unable to consent or refuse to consent… neither of those situations is consent.”

The jury was given questions to help it decide whether Muchirahondo was guilty of each of the charges.

Judge Preston then went over each of the charges, reminding the jury of what the defendants and defence had said about what had happened and setting out what they had to consider and agree on in order to reach a guilty verdict.

She added that on each charge the jury must reach a unanimous decision, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

If it were not otherwise, they would have to acquit Muchirahondo.

The jury was also informed that it is not the accused who has to prove his innocence, but only the prosecutor who has to convince the jury that the charges have been proven.

Judge Preston concluded her summing up this morning and the jury retired for deliberations at 10:55 a.m.

Last week, District Attorney Claire Boshier spent an entire day in court delivering her closing argument to the jury.

She began her speech by reading excerpts from statements by 15 women who said they were raped or assaulted by Muchirahondo.

“I wasn’t conscious so I couldn’t say no,” Boshier said, according to RNZ.

“He raped me – he didn’t have sex – he raped me.”

“She couldn’t walk straight, she could barely stand. She was babbling. She was almost completely drunk.

“When someone is in that state they are just taking advantage of the situation, that is not consent.”

Boshier said none of the women consented to the sexual contact — some were asleep when the “sex” began, were so drunk they were unable to consent, or were so drunk they passed out during intercourse.

In other cases, women repeatedly answered “no” but were ignored.

“Mr. Muchirahondo is a man who disregards the concept of consent,” Boshier said.

“What the other person wants, or even what condition they’re in, is irrelevant to him. He just doesn’t care. He focuses on what he wants… it was predatory.”

Muchirahondo’s attorney, Anselm Williams, addressed the jury for two days.

“Standing back and watching this (Crown’s closure), he must be to blame. But that approach is wrong,” he said.

“You are obliged to carefully examine the evidence presented … in relation to each of the charges brought against Mr. Muchirahondo.

“Only when you do it dispassionately… can you make a proper judicial decision.”

Williams said his job was not to convince the jury to “like” the defendant or defend his reputation.

He said Muchirahondo’s “issues of morality, views and attitudes” “are of very little importance.”

Only the facts were important.

“(The Crown) must satisfy you that each of these important elements has been established. Only when you are certain can you accept the Crown’s application.

“When you can’t be sure, you must issue an acquittal.”

Williams urged the jury to consider the evidence given by each of the 15 complainants as “equivalent to 15 separate trials”.

“Every accusation needs to be thoroughly investigated,” Williams said.

“Once you go through the process and analyze the allegations, you realize they are really problematic.

“You will have no choice but to pronounce a not guilty verdict on all charges brought against him.

“It’s important not to jump to conclusions just because 15 women have made allegations. Every accusation must be proven by the Crown and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Williams said Muchirahondo’s “complicated personal life” had to be taken into account.

He was born and raised in Zimbabwe. His father had 13 wives, and he has over 30 siblings.

He has four children with multiple women.

“She has a different approach to sex than we might expect in this country,” Williams said.

“The law is no different in Mr Muchirahondo’s case than it is in any of us, but his conduct must be considered in the context of his life and experiences up to the point of sexual intercourse.

“In Africa, a woman will pretend to be unavailable; she will pretend she doesn’t want it – but she really does want it.”

Williams said his client “never used physical force to force anyone to have sex with him” but was “persistent”.

“But you can’t equate persistence and selfishness with guilt,” he told the jury.

“The accused attempted to portray Mr. Muchirahondo as a person indifferent to consent… I submit on his behalf that this is not true.

“Be very, very careful – perseverance does not mean indifference.

“He is not the sober predator the Crown believes him to be.”

The Herald will publish the verdicts once the court issues them.

Anna Leask is a Christchurch-based reporter covering domestic crime and justice. She joined the Herald in 2008 and has worked as a journalist for 18 years, with a particular focus on domestic violence, child abuse, sexual violence, homicide, mental health and youth crime. She writes, hosts and produces the award-winning podcast A Moment In Crime, which is published monthly in nzherald.co.nz