The accused’s barrister, James Lawton, used his closing submissions on Wednesday to say the girl’s evidence could not be relied on, after she had answered yes to a question asking whether she was lying about the allegations.

But the prosecution said the details the girl – described as precocious and talented – had given about the alleged offences supported her claims.

A 52-year-old father, who cannot be named, is charged with committing sexual assault and acts of indecency on his daughter when she was aged six and seven.

He has pleaded not guilty to the six charges, five relating to acts of indecency and one of an offence of sexual intercourse without consent, which were allegedly committed between May and late December 2012.

The Crown, represented by prosecutor John Lundy, said the girl had described how the accused had taken her underwear off before the incidents and put them back on when he was finished, and done the same with his underwear.

“I put it to you that all the things [the girl] has told you are quite detailed,” Mr Lundy said.

The court has heard that the girl had previously made separate allegations against her grandfather, which the girl’s mother did not believe and were not substantiated.

Mr Lundy said the girl was confused when she replied yes when asked if the allegations against her father were a lie too. When asked one-by-one if each individual allegation was true, she had said yes, he said.

Mr Lawton said the jury should not accept the evidence of the girl, as she had said the incidents had occurred “thousands” of times, a claim accepted as inaccurate by the prosecution, and the allegations lacked detail.

“When it came to the crunch, when [the girl] was asked to give some details, she didn’t,” he said.

The defence also focused on the evidence given by Professor Donald Thomson, a child memory expert.

Professor Thomson had told the court on Tuesday the nine months that had passed between the first alleged offence and the first police interview last February could have made the girl's recall ''very, very poor'' and led to the omission and confusion of facts.

Professor Thomson expressed concern that the girl appeared to have discussed the issue with her mother.

Mr Lawton said the father was shocked and devastated when informed of the allegations, with his initial concern being the effect they might have on his daughter.

The accused and the girl's mother had divorced and were informally sharing custody of their daughter.

The accused said the girl had slept with him in his bed because she was scared of the dark, a fear the mother confirmed the child held.