Two defendants accused of sexually assaulting a woman on the steps of a church have been supported in court by their wife and former partner respectively.

Before Truro Crown Court are Calvin Rosevear, from Mullion, and Joe Skewes, from Helston, both now aged 40.

They are charged with a total of six offences relating to an alleged incident outside St Michael’s Church in Helston during the early hours of July 9 last year.

Rosevear is charged with rape involving penetration of the mouth, and additionally with sexual assault.

Skewes is charged with three counts of sexual assault and one of assault by penetration using fingers.

Both men have pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

You can read more from the first four days of the trial here:

On the fifth day of the trial the court heard character witnesses for both Rosevear and Skewes.

Speaking for Rosevear in person was his former partner and the mother of his child, who described him as “very affectionate, very loving, very lovely”.

She recalled how when the sister of a relative had been a bit drunk on a night out he had been “very protective of her”, making sure she got home safely.

The court also heard from his employer, who said he had known the defendant for 25 years on and off.

He described him as a “reliable” worker and “a credit” to the company, adding: “He would always have a job with me. Unfortunately he had a back injury and then surgery so I don’t think he’s going to be able to do anymore unfortunately.”

He said outside of work his children called Rosevear “Uncle Calvin”, adding: “He’s a lovely person. Integrity is very important to him. He’s there to support you whenever you need anything.”

Three letters were read out to the court on behalf of Skewes, including from his wife who said: “He’s an amazing husband. He works so hard, working six days a week to look after us. He makes us very happy.”

She described his work ethic as “like nothing else I’ve seen”, adding he was well known in the area.

“After this very testing year my love for Joe has not changed. He is a special man,” she added.

Rosevear's evidence

Both defendants gave evidence in person today (Friday). Rosevear told the court that before the night of the alleged incident, he had visited the Helford Estuary with his daughter to look for crabs and forage earlier in the day, before going to the Old Inn at Mullion for drinks with family and friends.

They included his co-defendant Joe Skewes, who he had known since they were both aged three.

He estimated that he had drunk seven or eight pints of Guinness during that time, and perhaps a couple of shots.

They left at around 11.30pm or midnight and walked from Skewes’ house into town, stopping near to the Godolphin Club for a line of cocaine before continuing to the Beehive.

Rosevear said after a drink they tried to go out the back of the pub for a cigarette but the area was closed, so they returned inside for a dance before going out the front door and over to the area near the cannon.

This, he said, was so they could take another line of cocaine and go to the toilet in the alleyway, but there were people there so they sat on the steps.

Rosevear told the court: “[The complainant] came up to us. She was quite drunk. She said ‘You’re f***ing hot’ to me.

“I think I commented on her breasts. It was quite a low cut top and I said ‘Your boobs are looking very nice.’ “I said ‘What are you doing this evening? Fancy a bit of fun?’ and she said ‘With both of you?’”

Rosevear continued: “She said, ‘I’ll get on the phone to my friends quickly and let them know what’s happening and we’ll go and have a bit of fun’.”

He said he remembered putting his face in her breasts, having asked her, and “she was more than happy.”

“It was an agreement between all three of us to go and find somewhere to have some fun,” he added.

Mobile phone messages

Earlier, the detective in the case was asked by Rosevear’s defence barrister Nigel Wraith to clarify why the complainant’s phone was not seized to check for any messages sent to her friends from the steps by the cannon.

The only messages shown to the jury were screenshots of Snapchat messages and photos of messages on mobile phones, taken by the complainant’s mother and her friend’s mother the following morning.

The detective explained that interviews with the defendants took place four days after the alleged incident and as the complainant primarily used Snapchat, messages on this platform disappeared 24 hours after being sent.

By the time this had become a ‘reasonable line of inquiry’, as it is known, there was no further content from that Sunday on her phone.

In cross examination, prosecutor Jason Beal questioned Rosevear about messages sent from the complainant’s mobile phone at some stage between 2.10am and 3.30am.

He said messages to a friend read “Where’s y” (“Where’s you”), the name of the friend and “Hemp”, with the complainant saying she also sent messages to a relative around the same time on the church steps.

Rosevear replied: “She wasn’t on her phone on the steps, that’s the thing.”

Mr Beal said: “She’s asking her friend for help. Asking her friend for ‘hemp’.

“Why would she do that?”

Rosevear replied: “I have no idea.”

Mr Beal continued: “It makes sense, because it’s what happened, she sent these messages while she’s with you and Joe,” to which Rosevear replied: “If she was on her phone, but she wasn’t.”

And Mr Beal continued: “Because she’s worried about what’s happening” – with Rosevear responding: “No that’s rubbish.”

Rosevear also said she “didn’t seem that drunk” when sat with them, and said the sexual acts were “100 per cent” consensual.

He also described the claim that the two men told the complainant they were going to find her friend as “absolute rubbish.”

Skewes's evidence

In his evidence, Skewes said the complainant had been speaking perfectly normally, was not falling over and was not protesting.

He said he could not remember much of the detail of what was said because of the alcohol he had drunk, only that Rosevear had suggested a threesome and he “couldn’t believe it” when she said yes.

Skewes described how on the steps of the church she began giving Rosevear oral sex, while he pulled aside her underwear and performed a sexual act on her using his fingers, adding: “It was very consensual.”

In response to a previous claim by the complainant, who described to police that Skewes was “latched on to me” and “like a hungry animal,” his defence barrister Rupert Taylor asked him: “Were you attacking her like some sort of animal? Were you slobbering all over her face?” – to which Skewes replied “No” to both questions.

In cross examination, Mr Beal asked him: “Did you say to [the complainant] ‘Are you still alright with this’?”, with Skewes replying he didn’t remember.

Mr Beal added: “Were you relying on the fact she agreed 15 minutes or so earlier?”

Skewes replied: “No. She was still as she was before.”

Regarding claims the two men told the complainant they knew where her friend was, and there was a house party, he replied: “One million per cent I can tell you that didn’t happen.”

"Can’t go home without a shag"

The court also heard from a woman the complainant had been drinking with that night, who earlier in the trial was reported to have heard the complainant say: “I need to go home with someone tonight. I need a shag.”

The witness said she and the complainant had been friends at school but had “drifted apart” in recent years before seeing each other out in Helston that night.

She said she had contacted the police around two weeks after the alleged incident, after reading a news report about the charges against Rosevear and Skewes.

The woman told the court that she and the complainant had been drinking together at Wetherspoons, the Red Lion and then the Beehive.

The woman claimed that the complainant had “said that she can’t go home without a shag tonight and that she had shagged 50-year-old blokes before. In the middle of the dancefloor, loud, so people could hear.”

In cross examination from Mr Beal she said she couldn’t remember if it was “bloke” or “blokes.”

Mr Beal asked why, in her initial email to police, the woman had said the complainant had “slept with a 55-year-old,” to which the woman replied: “Fifties. I knew that it was in the fifties.”

She agreed she “knew of” the defendants, and lived near one, but added: “I never really speak to him.”

Mr Beal then told her that on a form for the police, when asked to describe them, she had written: “Lovely blokes.”

“I don’t have anything bad to say about them,” added the woman.

The woman described the complainant as “pretty drunk”, but added: “She was in a state where she knew what she was doing; she wasn’t totally out of it. Just having a good night.”

She said she and her boyfriend had shared a taxi home with the complainant and “she was fine,” adding: “She was shouting at my boyfriend abuse [due to a falling out between the witness and her boyfriend]. She didn’t say anything about what happened.”

The trial continues.