A MAN on trial accused of rape has claimed the alleged victim made the allegations up as“revenge”.

Patrick Williams is accused of subjecting the woman to more than a year of emotional, physical and sexual abuse.

Giving evidence to day six of his trial on Wednesday, the 46-year-old Swindon man denied engaging in sexual activity without consent, and said he had no knowledge of the complainant sustaining the injuries.

Williams, also known as Dean, said that he had seen her two to three times a week, but had never seen bruises on her body, black eyes or handprints around the neck, which he is accused of causing.

When the allegations of violence were put to him by his barrister Chris Smyth, he said: “If I was doing what she alleged, she had plenty of opportunity to go to the police.”

Jurors were also told on Wednesday how Williams had previous convictions for rape and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

It was heard how Williams was jailed for assault occasioning actual bodily harm in 2005 after punching his girlfriend in the face, and forcing her to cut off her hair.

He had also been accused of punching another ex-partner in the face and stomach and threatening her with a hammer. The court heard he made her strip naked, perform a sexual act on herself and then raped her. He was jailed after a jury convicted him.

Williams said on Wednesday that he had been “open and honest” with the victim about his past. However, prosecutor Richard Tutt raised questions over why he never told her that he still maintains his innocence for the rape offence.

“Forgive me, you told her you that you were a convicted sex offender, but you didn’t tell her you were innocent?” he asked Williams.

The defendant replied: “Why would I? I’d just come out of jail from eight years, I wasn’t going to tell her that they got it wrong?”

Mr Tutt added: “But you’ve just told this jury that you’ve never met.”

When asked why two of the victim’s friends had given evidence last week saying they saw bruises and other injuries if it had never happened, Williams claimed they had been lying.

Mr Tutt asked: “[The witness has] come to court to perjure herself, to commit a criminal offence?”

Williams replied: “Just like [the victim] has. If [the witness] is saying that, why didn’t she intervene?”

“You’re trying to paint a picture to this jury of happy families,” Mr Tutt went on. “You are a fantasist and a liar, aren’t you?

“You lied when you were interviewed by the police, in relation to your previous rape allegation.

“The jury found you guilty. They did not accept your evidence. And you are lying now aren’t you?”

Waving the jury bundle, Williams replied: “The evidence states otherwise.”

Williams is charged with rape, assault by penetration, inciting a person to engage in sexual activity without consent, and two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. He denies all charges.

The trial continues.