A woman who alleges she had a knife held to her throat while a man threatened to rip her "daughter's eyes out" has conceded she is "confused" and "mixed up" about parts of the alleged ordeal.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The trial of Steven James Thompson, 38, continued in the ACT Supreme Court on Friday, with defence lawyer Jacob Robertson cross-examining the woman about her allegations.
Thompson and the woman met at a friend's house in December last year, and then consumed the drug ice together at her home for several days.
She alleges she saw him taking television sets from her neighbour's home after a break-in. It is alleged they went to another unit in Canberra with one of Thompson's friends.
While there, the woman alleges Thompson asked her for her bag, and then demanded she hand over her jewellery, while making threats to her daughter.
"He said he'd rip my daughter's eyes out and that I could dig the hole that she was going in," she told the ACT Supreme Court on Thursday.
Thompson is then alleged to have forced her to sign a receipt purportedly giving him ownership of her car, and then taking it.
Mr Robertson cross-examined the woman for several hours on Friday.
He highlighted discrepancies in the differing version she had given of the episode to police, prosecutors, and hospital staff.
She had first told prosecutors that Thompson had held the knife to her throat from behind.
But she told the court that he had been in front of her and that she had "looked at his eyes and they were black" as he held the knife.
She conceded that she'd become "mixed up" and "confused" about that, and that she could no longer remember where he was standing.
Mr Robertson also took her to her evidence that Thompson was trying to force her to give the second man oral sex.
He said that had never been mentioned to police in previous accounts.
She responded: "I'm not sure because I was so traumatised, and my medication started to come in."
The woman was also challenged on her evidence about who wrote out the receipt for the car, after giving evidence on Thursday that it was the second man, not Thompson, who was the author.
She said she had had time to think about it and now wasn't sure who wrote the note.
"I've had time to think about it, because it's not something I've wanted to think about over the last 12 months," she said.
The trial continues before Justice Hilary Penfold on Monday.
