A jury has retired to consider its verdict over whether Noosa councillor Frank Pardon indecently assaulted a teenage girl in the 1990s.

Key points: The jury heard from about 15 witnesses during the trial

The jury heard from about 15 witnesses during the trial Cr Pardon gave evidence saying the "First Wives Club" was out to get him

Cr Pardon gave evidence saying the "First Wives Club" was out to get him He also denied he had sexual interest or contact with the alleged victim

Today in the District Court trial in Maroochydore, Judge Glen Cash told the jury to carefully consider the evidence before them, having heard from about 15 witnesses, including the alleged victim, her family and friends, Cr Pardon's ex-wife, and two psychiatrists.

Judge Cash said if the jury was convinced the alleged offending had occurred, they would have to find it both unlawful and indecent, as the alleged victim's age meant she could not provide consent.

Cr Pardon, 70, is accused of indecently touching and conducting sex acts on the teenager over a four-month period, at a business, on drives in his car and at his home on the Sunshine Coast, before he was elected to council.

The councillor has pleaded not guilty to 11 charges, including the indecent treatment of a child under 16 and maintaining a sexual relationship with a minor, for acts alleged to have occurred in the 1990s.

Yesterday in the second week of the trial, Cr Pardon gave evidence denying all accusations of sexual contact with the alleged victim, and stating the "First Wives Club" was out to get him.

A forensic psychiatrist also gave evidence claiming hypnotherapy treatment undertaken by the alleged victim could have "altered her memories" and turned "suspicions into certainties".

Cr Pardon also denied he had sexual interest or contact with the alleged victim, describing it as "rubbish" and that "only a lesser man" would "do anything untoward to young girls".

He told the court he recalled the alleged victim staying at his home on one occasion, and he'd taken her and a school friend to a local swimming pool once, but said nothing had ever happened between them.

Earlier in the trial, the court heard evidence from a former school friend of the alleged victim, who said the accused had taken them to a local pool, then provided them with alcohol, before kissing the alleged victim twice in front of her.

Cr Pardon denied the claims, stating instead the girls had been "acting like pork chops" in the back of his vehicle due to being intoxicated, "trying to pull each other's bikinis off" and trying to pull the steering wheel of the car.

He told the court the pair then both placed the back of their hands on his crotch while he was driving and he had to tell them "to cut it out" before dropping them home.

'I said that to over 100 women'

Crown prosecutor Greg Cummings then questioned Cr Pardon about a recorded phone call between himself and the alleged victim years later, in which she explained the impact the alleged offending had had on her, saying she felt "he'd taken away her sexual firsts".

Cr Pardon can be heard in the recording saying "oh it did affect you? I would have left my wife and everything for you. It was hard."

"You were so young, we got close to real intimate at times, the resistance.

"I remember saying until you were 16 or older I didn't want to do anything over the top."

He said he told hundreds of women he would have left his wife for them, as a "term of endearment" and his wording in the second half of the phone call was a mistake.

"I meant to say, 'I didn't want you to do anything over the top sexually before you were 16'," he told the court.

He said the most "intimate" he had ever been with the alleged victim was the when she allegedly touched his crotch in the car, referring to his earlier evidence.

Mr Cummings suggested Cr Pardon was lying and told the jury the phone call was an admission of guilt.

'Hypnosis could have altered memory'

The trial also heard from forensic psychiatrist Dr John Roberts, who told the court it was his belief that hypnotherapy treatment — which the alleged victim underwent for separate reasons related to smoking and diet — could have altered her memories about the alleged incidents.

"It's accepted by authorities in the field that hypnosis does impact memory, it can make suspicions certainties," Dr Roberts said.

"Memories may have been altered or created by hypnosis.

"If you are thinking about problems which you make reference to, these are all things interconnected in terms of a person's psyche.

"It's impossible to isolate one aspect of a problem, you can't successfully say 'I'm only going to treat A without impinging on Y and Z' — it can't be done."

Judge Glen Cash questioned Dr Roberts about whether it was possible for a memory to be changed about a topic that was not raised during a session.

Dr Roberts said on "common sense grounds", it was more likely for a memory to be altered if it was raised during hypnotherapy, but it was possible to alter others that were not mentioned.

Mr Cummings told the court that Dr Roberts evidence was not consistent with earlier evidence from another psychiatrist, Dr Warwick Middleton, who said it was not possible to do so.

"In his opinion and literature, this form of hypnotherapy has no effect on people's memory," Mr Cummings said.

In his closing submission, counsel for the accused Andrew Hoare told the jury even if they felt Cr Pardon "probably did it", that wasn't enough for them to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the alleged victim's evidence had been "inconsistent".

Mr Cummings said Cr Pardon's evidence "did not make sense" and told the jury other witnesses who gave evidence supported the alleged victims claims.