In his closing arguments at his trial, Michael Nehass pleaded with the jury members to closely examine the evidence they’ve heard over the past two weeks.

“Nothing about this case adds up,” Nehass said Thursday morning. “I need you to really look at that ... I’m really depending on you here.

“I know it looks bad, and I’m charged with very serious charges.”

He referred to contradictions in the testimony of two key witnesses, the alleged victim, Agnes Reid, and Kathy Bailey, who said she saw Nehass assault Reid.

“It’s not little inconsistencies,” he said. “That’s what I want you to see. It’s very strong facts here.”

Nehass is accused of assaulting Reid in a Watson Lake apartment building, holding a knife to her throat and threatening to kill her and her family on Dec. 21, 2011.

Over the last two weeks, the trial has heard from several witnesses, including Reid, Bailey, Bailey’s daughter Lacey, Reid’s son, her former partner and two RCMP officers.

In her closing arguments Thursday, Crown prosecutor Terri Kaur briefly reviewed the details of each offence and cautioned the jury about red herrings – things that seem important but are only distracting.

The RCMP’s lack of photos from the alleged crime scene, Reid’s criminal record, as well as a drug trafficking charge that was stayed last year, and the lack of physical injuries she sustained are all red herrings, Kaur argued.

Both Reid and Bailey were “genuine and honest” witnesses. Inconsistencies in their stories are reflective of how human memory works, she said.

“Your common sense and life experience will help you decide what happened on December 11, 2011, in Watson Lake,” Kaur told the 12 jurors.

“I submit that the Crown has proven each offence beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Bibhas Vaze, a lawyer appointed to assist in the proceedings because Nehass is self-represented, argued the opposite.

What Kaur called red herrings are, in fact, “fundamental, important elements of the evidence that were different and contradicted,” he said.

He asked the jury to consider “the very real possibility that allegations have simply been made up by one or two individuals against Mr. Nehass.”

If both Reid and Bailey were telling the truth, key elements in their stories should be the same. But they’re not, Vaze said.

According to Reid’s testimony, she was leaving Lakeview Apartments when a shirtless and shoeless Nehass waved her over from the building’s front door. She went over, and he grabbed her and pulled her inside, she said.

Nehass hit her so hard her glasses flew off, dragged her by her hair and pushed and shoved her up the stairs, Reid said.

Nehass then pushed her into Bailey’s apartment, where Bailey was with her ex-husband and daughters.

He demanded the children leave, then locked the door behind them, Reid said.

Nehass continued to hit her. He choked her and at one point pulled a knife from his jeans and held it to her throat, she said. If she called police, he would kill her children and grandchildren, Reid said he told her.

All the while, Bailey and her ex-husband watched, but didn’t call police, Reid said. Bailey asked Nehass not to slit Reid’s throat in her apartment because she didn’t want blood everywhere, she said.

After about 30 to 45 minutes, Nehass left and she walked out of the apartment with Bailey, Reid said.

Crying, she drove back to her house. Her ex-partner, son, granddaughter and mother were also at the home.

Reid waited four to five hours before calling the police – until her son-in-law came home from Fort Nelson, B.C., to pick up her granddaughter. Reid said she was concerned for the girl’s safety.

Vaze argued this story defied common sense.

Reid testified she was in a rush that day leaving the apartment, yet she decided to go over to Nehass, who was only wearing a pair of jeans, when he called to her?

And over the course of a 30- to 45-minute assault, the lawyer asked, no one in the building reported hearing any commotion?

Rather than waiting hours to call the police, when Nehass was potentially still in the apartment building “a mere two minutes away,” why did one of her other family members not take the granddaughter out of the house?

“I suppose it didn’t make any sense because it didn’t happen,” Vaze said.

RCMP officers later came by Reid’s home and took photos of her neck, to document some redness. She sustained no physical injuries.

“Somebody’s getting hit for 30 to 45 minutes in an apartment and we see no injuries?” Vaze asked. “Let’s use our common sense here.”

When cross-examining Reid last week, he suggested she wanted to put Nehass in jail to get him out of the community. Reid denied this.

Bailey testified that she was the manager of Lakeview Apartments at the time, and was cleaning the building on Dec. 21, 2011.

She and her ex-husband went into her apartment to take a break, and that’s when Reid and Nehass came through the front door, she said.

Her daughters were not present, she said.

Nehass hit Reid a few times, Bailey said, then pushed her onto a chair and pulled out a knife. Reid was shouting, Bailey said.

“Michael was ranting and raving,” she said. “He was telling her she was going to get it and he was going to beat the sh** out of her.”

Bailey said she begged Nehass to let Reid go. Finally, he told the woman he would “let her live” because of Bailey, who’d known his parents for years, she testified.

When Nehass left, so did Reid, and Bailey locked the door behind them, she said. She didn’t call the police, because she was worried about the safety of her daughter Lacey, who hung out with Nehass’ sister.

But an audio statement Bailey gave to police two weeks after the alleged incident contradicts that story.

In the statement, she tells Const. Colin Kemp that she saw no altercation between Reid and Nehass. In fact, she didn’t see Reid in the building at all that day, she said. She saw Nehass once, briefly, when he walked by her in the hallway.

Bailey testified that she denied seeing the assault because she was concerned for Lacey’s safety.

Though Kaur said the jury shouldn’t disbelieve Bailey’s testimony, Vaze said it called her credibility into question.

“The only problem with all of this is Kathy Bailey is a liar,” he said. “The only thing we don’t know is what she’s lying about exactly.”

He suggested the statement she gave RCMP at the time was the truth – that she never saw anything because nothing ever happened.

The fact that Bailey didn’t come to court when she was supposed to last week, forcing the judge to issue a warrant for her arrest, proves that she didn’t take the court process seriously, Vaze said.

“Did she talk to Agnes Reid? We don’t know,” he said.

“Is she in cahoots with Agnes Reid? We don’t know…. Was she not coming to court because she was trying to decide if she was going to tell lies? We don’t know. It all just doesn’t add up.”

Lacey Bailey also testified briefly last week, and said she didn’t remember any altercation between Reid and Nehass. However, she said she doesn’t remember much from that time because she was drinking and doing drugs.

Terence Dendys, Reid’s former partner, lived in the unit next door to Bailey’s. He testified he didn’t hear any unusual noises that day, but admitted he was likely drinking at the time.

Reid’s former partner, Lyle Gilmore, testified he remembered her coming home one evening so scared, she was shaking uncontrollably and had peed her pants.

He admitted he couldn’t remember if this was Dec. 21, 2011, or another day entirely.

Reid’s son said he also remembered his mother coming home with redness on one side of her face.

Vaze argued these events happened on completely different days.

RCMP did not search Bailey’s apartment, nor the stairs where Reid says her glasses flew off, Const. Patrick McRorie told the court. They never found a knife.

“There is clear doubt, in my submission, on everything here,” Vaze said. If anything raises doubt in jurors’ minds, the accused must be acquitted, he said.

“Mr. Nehass is a human being, just like all of us. You don’t have to like him or dislike him. You just have to respect his liberty rights…”

For an hour and a half this morning, Justice Scott Brooker charged the jury, giving them instructions on how the law applies in the case. They will be sequestered until they come up with a verdict.