Lawyers for a man accused of a violent rape, where the alleged victim lost more than 1.5 litres of blood, have attempted to discredit the woman by highlighting several lies she told police.
Robert Glen Sirl, 48, has been charged with raping the woman and allegedly causing her grievous bodily harm. He pleaded not guilty.
The jury heard evidence of how the woman was found by paramedics with a pool of blood in the crotch of her pants and was rushed to hospital requiring immediate surgery.
She suffered five incised wounds caused by a sharp, bladed object, consistent with a knife, a doctor said, however the exact object that caused the injuries could not be determined.
The woman reported she had gone to Mr Sirl's home in August last year to purchase cannabis, they consumed methamphetamine together and then he said $68,000 had gone missing and would not let her leave until it was found.
She said he then brought her to the bedroom where he allegedly threw her on the bed and raped her while pinning her down. She reported feeling immense pain.
Mr Sirl denied causing her any injuries but said they had had consensual sex that day.
Defence barrister Katrina Musgrove told the jury the woman's evidence had been riddled with inconsistencies and she had proved not to be a credible witness.
She pointed to the fact that the woman had neglected to tell the police she had had a casual sexual relationship with Mr Sirl prior to the alleged attack.
She said even after the alleged attack she had maintained contact with Mr Sirl.
She pointed to other inconsistencies such as the woman initially saying she had been raped by someone she met on Tinder, then suggesting that was an unbelievable tale as she would never use Tinder, despite actually having an account.
However, prosecutor Trent Hickey said the woman's actions must be taken in the context of her own past and the fact she was "embarrassed and ashamed" after the alleged attack.
"There is no standard or predictable response to trauma or sexual abuse," Mr Hickey said.
He told the jury the woman had been terrified of Mr Sirl and she had been worried about telling her children about the alleged attack and the extent of her injuries.
She had initially told them it had been a complication of menopause, partly because her children had warned her about associating with Mr Sirl and she felt ashamed.
Mr Hickey said while some details about meeting a man on Tinder, and where this man lived, had been fabrications, the details the woman gave about the alleged attack itself had remained consistent throughout.
He said it was Mr Sirl, in his interview with police, that had been an unbelievable witness.
Mr Sirl claimed he had heard the woman making moaning sounds from the female amenities block near his home and thought she was having a good time without him and wouldn't interrupt.
Later on he said he attended to her and helped her back to her home when he saw the blood.
Mr Hickey pointed to evidence from a medical expert that it would have been practically impossible for the woman to give herself those injuries, as the pain would have been unbearable.
Ms Musgrove also pointed to a lack of any physical evidence, DNA for example, linking Mr Sirl to the alleged attack.
However, the jury heard that with the amount of blood the woman lost, any DNA from Mr Sirl that could have been present, could have been lost.
The jury retired to deliberate its verdict late on Tuesday afternoon.