A Chester man who works with autistic adults is standing trial accused of the rape of a ‘vulnerable and naive’ teenage girl on a night out in Chester city centre last year.

James Parry’s alleged victim agreed to go down an alleyway to show him a tattoo after the pair struck up a conversation outside Rosies nightclub during the early hours of June 20, 2015.

In St Peter’s Courtyard, the complainant – who was 18 at the time of the alleged incident – claims they kissed consensually but he went on to rape her in a doorway.

Twenty-five-year-old Parry, of Marlston Avenue in Westminster Park, has repeatedly denied raping the complainant during his trial at Warrington Crown Court and insists any sexual contact between them was consensual.

He was convicted of sexually assaulting her following a trial last year, but the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the rape charge.

A lot of alcohol

On the fourth day of the trial before a new jury on Thursday (March 17), Parry accepted he had consumed a lot of alcohol but rejected prosecutor Mark Connor’s claim that he had drunk too much and decided he was going to have his ‘way’ with the complainant whether she gave consent or not.

“Did you think to yourself that she had kissed you and showed you the tattoo on her hip by pulling her dress up and that gave you the green light to do what you wanted sexually?” Mr Connor asked.

Parry, who used to work at The Commercial Hotel, replied no. He explained he had been waiting for his friend, who he had spent the night with before they became separated at the Marlborough Arms, when he and the complainant met.

He told the jury of eight men and four women that they consensually touched one another but he stopped as soon as he realised she was uncomfortable.

“She was not comfortable with the situation,” Parry said. “I’m not sure why. Maybe because it all happened so quickly.”

CCTV footage

The jury was shown CCTV footage of Parry and the complainant on Watergate Row.

Parry was seen picking her up so they could go back the way they came because she wanted to return to her friends.

He told the court he realises now that picking her up – which he did twice – only served to make her more distressed.

“I did not realise until after how upset she was,” he said.

“It may have been the alcohol but I did not realise how distressed she was. It was only when I put her down that I saw how upset she was and I apologised that what I had done had upset her.”

Voicemail message

A voicemail the complainant left on her friend’s phone was played to the court, during which Parry can be heard saying ‘don’t palm me off’ and the complainant says ‘I just get scared’ and tells him it was ‘nice’ to meet him.

The defendant was seen running away after the complainant left him and Mr Connor asked him if he was getting away from the ‘scene of the crime’ because he was worried that the complainant would report the matter to the police immediately.

“No, because I had nothing to be worried about,” Parry said.

Defending, Owain Edwards compared the case to a football match in which the defendant is already 1-0 down due to his conviction for sexual assault.

He said Parry is a ‘decent’ young man who has let himself and his family down.

“He has not on any view acted as the perfect gentleman described by his friends and family.”

But Mr Edwards urged the jury to consider all the evidence before deciding on a verdict.

Friends of defendant

Paula Westwood, a friend of Parry’s for the past four years, told the court he was ‘very trustworthy’ and had never been ‘pervy’ towards her, even when they shared a bed once following a night out.

A character witness statement by Parry’s former girlfriend Katie Saunders was read to the court.

She said the pair had met at a summer camp in America and continued their relationship when they returned to the UK.

He treated her nothing less than a ‘princess’ and never made her do anything she did not want to, she said.

The couple split up due to the pressures of being in a long-distance relationship but have remained good friends.

In his closing speech to the jury, Mr Connor said: “The complainant did not know this man. She had only met him a couple of minutes before. She did not know what he was capable of. She had trusted him and engaged him in mutual kissing. She cannot be blamed for being naive and vulnerable.”

The jury is expected to retire to consider its verdict tomorrow (Friday, March 18).