A celebrity who is on trial for engaging in sexual activity with a 16-year-old girl when he was 27 has said the girl was never in his home to the best of his recollection.
He also denied that any sexual activity had taken place with the underage girl.
The man, who is now in his 40s and cannot be identified, has denied three charges of engaging in sexual acts with the girl between August and December 2010.
Giving evidence today in his defence, he told the jury that the girl told him she was 18 after they met at the Oxegen festival in 2010.
He said there had been some exchange of texts after that and they had met for a brief lunch in Dublin in the weeks that followed.
He said in January of the following year the girl revealed her true age to him. At that stage, she had turned 17.
He said that was "a little bit of a shock or a surprise", but said no sexual activity had taken place between them before that.
The man said he took the woman to his workplace, but not at the time she alleged, and that no sexual activity took place there.
"It did not happen," he told the jury.
Concert tickets
The man said he never used a back staircase as alleged by the complainant. He said he did not remember arranging concert tickets for the girl, but accepted it was possible.
However, he said she was not in his home the night of the concert on 14 December 2010 as he had been recording a show and had gone for a drink afterwards with his boss.
A credit card statement showed a payment to a takeaway restaurant, which he said was often delivered to the offices of the company he was working for on that show.
He said he was certain he had recorded the show on a Tuesday because the previous day he had booked a flight to London and it was "not conceivable" that he would have been able to have his laptop out to book a flight on a recording day.
The man said he had never carried the girl up the stairs in his house as she claimed in the witness box. "She was not in my house to the best of my recollection, ever," he said.
He said the woman had been in another office with him at a later date, but not in the evening and that no sexual activity had taken place there either.
The defendant also said he had stayed at a Dublin hotel for one night when home for Christmas in 2011.
He said he had booked the room because he planned to be socialising with friends on St Stephen's night and thought they "might get a bit sloppy" and he did not want to arrive back to his family home and wake his parents and siblings.
A series of text messages were read to the jury detailing arrangements with friends and details of a night out on 26 December 2011 after which he stayed at the hotel.
In her evidence, the complainant said she had been in the hotel with him more than once and one of those times was around Christmas.
In his evidence, the defendant said she had only spent one night there with him the following summer when she was 18.
He said he did not meet her that Christmas and there was no one with him in the hotel room.
Replying to a series of questions from his barrister Morgan Shelley, the man repeated that he never had a sexual relationship with the girl before she was 17 or before she told him her real age.
Asked if he ever asked her to keep a secret, he replied: "No."
Asked if anything had ever happened in his workplace, he replied: "No." Asked again if she had ever been in his house, he said: "No."
Asked to repeat his answer by the judge, he replied: "Not to my recollection, no."
Cross-examination
During cross-examination by prosecuting counsel Eilis Brennan SC, the defendant agreed he had met the girl at the Oxegen festival and had passed his phone across a barrier to her so she could put her number into the phone.
Asked what his motive was at that stage, he replied: "It was a festival and she made eye contact it was an over 18s festival and she was nice and I took her number."
He agreed it was reasonable to suggest he fancied her. He denied that there had been any further contact or kissing between them on that occasion.
The defendant said there was intermittent contact after that and the first time the girl told him her real age was in January 2011, when she had turned 17.
He said they had gone to a particular restaurant for lunch, but it was put to him by the prosecuting counsel that the restaurant was not there in 2011.
He replied that was his memory of the day.
Asked why he said he was "shocked and surprised" when the girl revealed her true age if he had only had intermittent contact with her, he replied it was the fact that she had lied about her age.
The defendant had maintained that this was the only time he had taken her to his workplace.
Ms Brennan put it to him that despite the fact that he was saying it was only the second time he had met the girl and he had just found out that she had lied to him, notwithstanding that he decided to show her around his workplace. He replied: "Yes."
Asked if the complainant was correct in her description of the premises, he replied: "Yes."
However, he said they had never opened a fire exit door and had never been in the stairwell.
Asked how then, the complainant could have understood the layout of the building so well and accurately describe the stairwell if she had not been there, the defendant replied that it was not a big office.
Ms Brennan put it to him that "she wouldn't have known about the stairwell unless she was in the stairwell".
The defendant said she may have seen a fire door.
He said the complainant's evidence that it was summertime was not correct and he reminded counsel that he had "willingly" handed over all his phones and passwords to gardaí.
"There was never anything explicitly sexual" in the messages, he said.
Ms Brennan put it to him that even after the girl was of age and there had been sexual activity, there was never anything sexual in their messages.
Asked about the complainant's friend who gave evidence that was "completely consistent" with the complainant's about oral sex in the stairwell of the office, the defendant said he could not account for what she told her friends.
His cross-examination continues on Monday
Number of phones examined
Earlier, the court heard details of what gardaí found from an examination of a number of phones that had been seized from the defendant's home.
The analysis showed the complainant's number had been saved into the defendant's phone on the night of the Oxegen festival in 2010.
The complainant’s number was saved on a number of the phones and on one was saved under a man's name.
Text messages identified on the phone were outside of the time period for the allegations in the trial, the court was told, and the software used to extract the messages is not capable of finding everything on a phone.
The garda witness said the analysis showed one phone had been effectively wiped and restored to factory settings, but agreed this was often done and there was nothing sinister about it.
