Two distinct theories about what happened the night that Karen Rodrigue stabbed Gerald Dawson surfaced in the lawyers' closing arguments this morning in Yukon Supreme Court.

While both versions contain the same major event that Rodrigue stabbed and killed Dawson in the early morning hours of June 17, 2004 her motive for grabbing the black-handled knife from his kitchen counter, varies vastly between the two accounts.

Defence counsel Nils Clarke addressed the jury first.

He explained how defence believes events spiralled out of control sometime after 1:30 a.m. in Dawson's small green home in the Marwell industrial area.

Dawson raped Rodrigue, Clarke said, in the way she testified on the stand.

The bruising found on Dawson's face and neck in the forensic report are consistent with her account of fighting against him during the assault, he told the seven women and five men of the jury.

The fact that Dawson was found naked with Viagra in his blood, and that the pair of underwear Rodrigue said she was wearing that day was ripped, all support her version of events, Clarke said.

While the Crown suggested damage to the burgundy thong could have been done in the washing machine during the 10 days after the assault, Clarke said, the argument 'doesn't hold water.'

'That would be one aggressive washing machine,' he told the court.

The underwear is compelling evidence, he said, because Rodrigue had no chance to doctor it.

She was arrested on June 27 and has been in custody at Whitehorse Correctional Centre ever since.

This means that Dawson's home, Rodrigue's apartment and the two vehicles were all 'frozen in time,' Clarke told the court.

The evidence, Clarke said, does not support an argument over money, which the Crown subsequently outlined was Rodrigue's motive for killing Dawson.

'(An argument over money) would not be as emotionally laden as what occurred after the rape,' Clarke said.

It was an argument over money that caused Rodrigue to reach for the knife, however, according to the Crown.

Rodrigue was on the cusp of a downward spiral into a 'drug run,' Crown prosecutor David McWhinnie told the court.

'She was in the throes of an addiction at the time she met up with Gerald and at the time she killed Gerald,' he said.

Paraphrasing forensic psychiatrist Dr. Shabehram Lohrasbe's testimony, McWhinnie said Rodrigue was in a state where she would 'do almost anything to get drugs.'

Based on testimony of Dawson's character, McWhinnie said the deceased was not the type of man to commit rape.

'It's implausible from the outset,' he said.

'The story about her being raped is just that, ladies and gentleman, a story.'

In terms of Dawson's harsh language, he said it provides little insight into the events that transpired in the Marwell-area home.

Dawson was a 'man's man, working in a man's world,' he told the court.

'This rape never happened. She's making it up and she's been making it up as she goes along.'

In closing, he summarized that Rodrigue fatally stabbed Dawson for money.

'She wanted more from him and he wasn't going to give it to her,' he said.

'She killed him because he wasn't going to give her what she wanted.'

Defence is asking for a manslaughter conviction, while the Crown is seeking second-degree murder.

Presiding Justice Leigh Gower said today he will charge the jury Monday.