A jury has been told NRL player Jack de Belin was the "instigator" of an alleged sexual assault of a woman and he "thought he could do whatever he wanted" before his friend Callan Sinclair joined in.
Crown prosecutor David Scully finished his closing arguments on Tuesday during the fourth week of a NSW District Court trial where de Belin, 29, and Sinclair, 23, stand accused of jointly raping a then 19-year-old woman in a North Wollongong apartment, south of Sydney, following a night out.
The pair have pleaded not guilty to five counts of aggravated sexual intercourse and claim the threesome was consensual.
Read more: The Jack de Belin rape trial so far
Mr Scully told the court, de Belin and Sinclair's version of events "went too far" and were "inherently implausible", and were not supported by the details they gave to friends during phone calls that were intercepted by police.
Mr Scully detailed the events that the Crown alleged happened inside the bedroom to the jury, which started with de Belin walking into the bathroom while the woman was using the toilet.
"This is indicative of de Belin's attitude on the night," Mr Scully said. "He thought he could do whatever he wanted.
"He expected that when he walked around naked it would inevitably lead to sex.
"In the Crown's submission, de Belin formed the view that it was going to happen whether the complainant liked it to happen or not...then he took that sex by force."
Mr Scully asked the jury to reject the men's version of events that claimed the woman started kissing Sinclair in the bedroom while de Belin took a quick shower.
"They say Sinclair started things off but then he took a back seat while de Belin started kissing her and took her to the bed," Mr Scully said
"The Crown submits de Belin was in reality the instigator and he was leading the way."
Mr Scully suggested Sinclair may have been in "shock or surprised" when he saw, as the Crown alleged, de Belin take off the woman's top and push her onto the bed.
Mr Scully said Sinclair had a "choice in those moments" and he made the "wrong choice" when he "joined in".
Mr Scully took the jury through the woman's evidence again, and highlighted how they could be satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, of each element of the charges.
"They say de Belin performed oral sex on the woman, but it is the Crown's submission that that didn't happen and they have weaved it into a version of events to give some reference to the 'v' gesture [the woman made on the Mr Crown dance floor]"," Mr Scully said.
The prosecutor told the jury the Crown alleged de Belin undid the woman's top, pushed her onto the bed, and as she was trying to cover her breasts they both said words to the effect of "show us your rack".
Mr Scully reminded jurors the woman said "no" and "stop" before de belin took off the woman's pants and underwear. He then allegedly pushed open her legs, lent on top of her, rested his forearm on her collarbone and had his hand around her neck.
Mr Scully said de Belin allegedly put his penis inside of the woman and he had penile vaginal intercourse with her.
He reminded the jury that the woman had previously told them, "I just said 'stop', but when he put his penis inside of me there was pretty much [nothing] I could about it. No one was listening to me. I had tears coming out of my eyes."
Mr Scully then took the jury through the evidence the Crown relies for the charge of de Belin recklessly causing the woman actual bodily harm when he put his forearm on her chest and grabbed her throat.
He went on to explain how Sinclair allegedly then had sexual intercourse with the woman without her consent before de Belin then allegedly had oral sex without the woman's consent when he grabbed her hair and forced his penis into her mouth.
Mr Scully said the men swapped positions with Sinclair having oral sex while de Belin had vaginal intercourse, before the men changed positions again two more times.
The prosecutor said de Belin's evidence that the trio had a "chat" before swapping positions "goes too far".
"There would be nothing unusual or wrong during a normal sexual encounter to move locations without discussing it," he said.
"De Belin is weaving this into his version of events."
Mr Scully then asked the jury to consider the woman's evidence of de Belin "deliberately" forcing his penis into this woman's anus.
He said none of the acts were committed with the consent of the woman and the men were "cheering each other on".
Mr Scully said both the men's version of the events claimed the woman was "moaning" and said "yes" but he said there was no reference to the woman saying "yes" during the telephone intercepts, rather Sinclair said "there was no verbal or physical resistance".
Earlier in the closing submission, the Crown prosecutor reminded the jury of Troy Martin's evidence, who was a roommate at the Gipps Street townhouse.
Mr Martin previously told the court he was awoken after hearing noises, went downstairs to investigate before he stood in the doorway of the bedroom and saw de Belin standing naked at the foot of the bed, a woman lying naked on the bed and Sinclair standing in the room.
Mr Martin then said he left the room, the door was closed, he went to the main bathroom before de Belin walked into it and spoke to him briefly before Mr Martin returned to bed.
Mr Scully said if the jury believed Mr Martin's evidence, despite him lying to police about it, then he only saw the encounter for a few seconds but did not hear "no" or "yes" from the woman, only her allegedly saying "Jack's who's that'.
Mr Scully said the woman had no recollection of there being a housemate in the apartment, likely because he was only there for a few moments and her focus and attention was on the two men in the bedroom.
The trail continues.