WARNING: This story includes graphic details some readers may find disturbing.

Both defence lawyers in the sexual assault trial of two former University of Ottawa hockey players called the complainant a "liar" in their closing arguments as they called for their clients' acquittals.

The two-week trial ended in Thunder Bay on Friday. Guillaume Donovan and David Foucher are each facing one charge of sexual assault relating to an incident that happened after a Gee-Gees away game in the city 2014.

Court has heard testimony from the complainant, two former teammates of the accused, the team's former coach and one of the woman's friends.

The young woman said she was having consensual sex with a member of the Ottawa team when it was interrupted and two men forced her to perform sexual acts. The Crown has argued the men have been identified through a combination of witness testimony and circumstantial evidence as Donovan and Foucher.

Donovan and Foucher testified in their defence yesterday.

Defence calls complainant 'liar'

Christian Deslauriers, the lawyer representing Donovan, said the complainant had perjured herself by denying she co-ordinated her police statements with the Gee-Gee player with whom she had had consensual sex. Deslauriers obtained records of texts between the complainant and the player, who was the first witness in the trial, during his cross-examination.

In the texts from the months following the incident, they talked about giving statements to police.

"She perjured herself and she lied to your face and we have a paper trail," Deslauriers told the judge in French.

Christian Deslauriers is the defence lawyer for Guillaume Donovan, seen her outside the Thunder Bay Court House on Feb. 6, 2018. (Matthew Kupfer/CBC)

Deslauriers said complainant created almost a half a dozen versions of events between what she told her friend that night, her four police interviews and what she said under oath. He said he believed the complainant had consented to a threesome when Donovan's roommate had asked. He argued she later felt embarrassed and created the story that followed.

He argued the reason the complainant protested when her friend wanted to confront the coach and take her to the hospital is because the complainant lied to her friend about what happened.

He said her lack of credibility raised serious questions about reasonable doubt in the case.

Foucher's identification weak: lawyer

Celina Saint-Francois, Foucher's defence lawyer, also attacked the complainant's credibility and said she'd shown a great capacity for lying.

The only consistency between her testimony and the man she had consensual sex with was that the two of them had sex together and he walked toward the washroom when he stopped, Saint-Francois said.

Celina Saint-Francois is the defence lawyer represent David Foucher in the sexual assault trial involving the former University of Ottawa hockey player and his teammate, Guillaume Donovan. (Matthew Kupfer/CBC)

Saint-Francois attacked the basis for identifying Foucher as one of the men who allegedly assaulted the complainant.

In her testimony, the complainant said one of the men had red hair, was bigger than her, muscular, and spoke with a deep voice and French accent.

Saint-Francois said every man on the team was bigger than the complainant and court had heard nearly half the Gee-Gees roster were francophones.

Crown focuses on consent

Crown lawyer Marc Huneault said the issue of consent in the subjective mind of the complainant is at the heart of the prosecution's case.

He argued the court is only required to believe the complainant on two facts; that she did not consent and that there were two men who assaulted her.

On the testimony of the accused, Huneault highlighted that Donovan told the court he never spoke directly to the woman before, during or after their sexual relations.

On Thursday, Donovan told court his roommate asked the complainant if she was okay having sex with Donovan after he approached them. Donovan maintained on the stand that the woman didn't push him back or rebuff him and they were looking at each other throughout.

Huneault argued consent must be more explicit than a look when it involves two people who have never met before and that consent is required before any sexual act takes place.

The Crown argued Foucher's testimony should be rejected and that it was a detailed account that served to exonerate him. Huneault said Foucher told the Gee-Gees coach he had no recollection of that night merely two days after the event.

​Foucher told court Thursday he never met or interacted with the complainant. He and other players got naked and snuck into the hotel room where the woman was having sex as a prank on a fellow player, he told court.

Huneault said Foucher showed no real remorse in his testimony and had treated the woman as on object of ridicule.

Today's arguments concluded a two-week trial. Justice Chantal Brochu is expected to deliver a decision on June 25.

CBC Ottawa's Matthew Kupfer is in Thunder Bay covering the trial. You can review his live tweets here.