Scott John White, a Queanbeyan-based officer at the time of the alleged offending in 2015, is standing trial in the ACT Supreme Court after pleading not guilty to two counts of perjury.

The charges involve him making false statements while giving evidence during a July 2015 ACT criminal hearing involving his then girlfriend, Sarah-Jane Parkinson, who falsely accused her former partner of raping her.

The court heard Parkinson, now 31 and his wife, was sentenced to jail.

The Crown accuses Mr White of lying about speaking with Parkinson related to their police statements during her case.

The second alleged offence was that Mr White lied about his use of condoms with Parkinson.

Crown prosecutor Anthony Williamson said this was relevant to the false rape complaint because Parkinson claimed that her assailant used a condom "whilst she was supposedly raped and left the wrapper behind".

Audio of the 2015 hearing played during trial had Mr White saying, "no, I knew that she was making one [statement] ... I was aware there was a statement but that's it".

Asked a number of times if they spoke about what would go in their statements, he said no.

Mr White said the pair had spoken about the case but not the "fine specifics".

As for the condom issue, Mr White said "we never used condoms at all" because he had a vasectomy in 2009 before he met Parkinson.

The trial heard Mr White conceded condoms were used during anal sex, but he thought questions about use related to only penile-vaginal sex.

He also told a police officer they used condoms for only anal sex but excluded it from his statement because the officer ignored it.

In his closing statement on Wednesday, Mr Williamson said the accused's denials about the statements were "simply untrue" because "clear and compelling" evidence, including text messages, showed the pair discussing the details of her case.

Mr Williamson said this included about 45 minutes before one of the statements was made.

MORE COURT NEWS

Mr Williamson said the jury had to decide only on two narrow issues: did the accused under oath give evidence that was untrue and, if so, was he reckless about it?

He said they could be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt about Mr White's guilt based on cumulative forces.

These included that he was a police officer and should have appreciated the importance of honest answers, the questions of condom use was not out of the blue as he was already asked about it during police investigations and that there was no rational explanation why he inferred that condom use applied only to vaginal sex.

Defence barrister John Purnell, SC, said the Crown's 2015 questions put to Mr White were ambiguous and the prosecutor never cross examined him about the condom issue considering its importance.

"The Crown prosecutor did not ask Scott White one single question. Not even a sausage of a question about condoms," Mr Purnell said.

"He said his answers [in 2015] were accurate and truthful at the time," Mr Purnell said.

"He [now] accepts it was a mistake because now he sees the question was wide enough to cover anal sex."

The defence is relying on "mistake of fact" related to the condom issue.

Mr Purnell also referred to other witnesses in the trial, including a long-serving police officer, who gave evidence about Mr White's good character.

"I couldn't fault him. He's honest, reliable, trustworthy. I'm surprised that I'm here today," the officer said.

The court heard Mr White was an intermediary between police and Parkinson during their investigation of her.

Justice Michael Elkaim told jurors they could take that role into account when assessing his recklessness and falsity.

The jury began deliberations on Wednesday afternoon.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: