While it was not amongst the 13 charges, Mr Kimball told the court he would be referring to the occurrence, and a variety of others in sessions leading up to the supposed offences, as contextual proof to show “it wasn't just that he unexpectedly did something on the 5th or 6th session; the Crown case is it began with day one”.
During the very first five consultations, Mr Kimball told the court, Mr Behi would take down the plaintiff's underwear and massage her buttocks. Throughout the 5th session, he observed a scar on her abdomen and used Google Translate to ask the female how she received it.
He stated the complainant would tell the jury why she continued to see the implicated and why she didn't say anything at that time.
Mr Kimball said she did ask for the massage to stop on other occasions, with Mr Behi informing her “it wasn't a regular massage”.
Riaz Behi is pleading innocent to the charges. Credit: Nine News She told him”she desired a routine massage and informed him never to do that once again”, Mr Kimball stated. Regardless of this, the woman continued to book appointments with Mr Behi and he continued to perform inappropriate massages on her genital area, Mr Kimball stated.
Throughout the last session, her 17th with Mr Behi, the plaintiff stated he eliminated her underwear and used a vibrating machine on her groin and abdominal area, which caused her discomfort. After she pressed it away and told him to stop, Mr Kimball stated Mr Behi carried out a regular massage on her prior to raising her legs and performed a sex act.
“She'll inform you how she reacted to that,” Mr Kimball said.
Mr Behi's lawyer, William Brewer, told the court he will be raising “questions about the behaviour of the plaintiff”– in specific, her willingness to continue seeing Mr Behi for 17 sessions.
“Why does she keep returning if these horrendous things are said to be taking place to her? That will be a really live problem in this trial,” Mr Brewer said.
A “throwaway line” from the Crown suggesting “she ‘d spent for all these sessions, she simply felt she needed to return” is “outright rubbish”, he said.
“No one in the circumstances laid out by the Crown would dare be putting up with that kind of treatment.”
Beginning her evidence on Thursday afternoon, the complainant informed the court through a Japanese interpreter that Mr Behi pulled her underwear down around her thighs and exposed her “butt” throughout the very first consultation, something which had “never ever took place” to her in Japan.
Asked by the Crown if she stated something at the time, she replied “I wanted to.”
The trial continues.
Jenny Noyes is a reporter at the Sydney Morning Herald.