A leading figure in the entertainment industry had been at the centre of “rumours and allegations” involving women previously but he’d always denied he’d done anything wrong, a High Court jury has been told.

A second business associate took the stand today in a High Court trial of the man who is facing 25 charges relating to nine complainants.

The charges involve allegations of rape, sexual assault and the use of drugs - sometimes meaning the women were unable to have control of their bodies.

Another business associate gave evidence for the Crown on Monday.

The second business associate told the jury he and the first business associate were “shocked” when they were told by one of the man’s friends the man had gone into a woman’s bedroom, kissed her, held her against a wall and sexually assaulted her - despite the woman begging him to stop.

The second business associate said the man’s friend told him the incident had happened while they were staying at a house out of town.

He was told the friend accidentally walked into a woman’s bedroom, thinking it was the bathroom, and found the man in the room with the woman.

The woman asked the man’s friend not to leave and to help her. The friend got the man out of the room and spent the next few hours consoling the woman because she was crying off and on and was “terrified” the man would go back into the room.

The second business associate said he told the man’s friend he needed to report it to the police because it was “that serious” and he himself also contacted his own lawyer to check what he should be doing.

The two business associates later approached the man about the allegations.

The second business associate said the man told them he kissed the woman but she stopped because she felt guilty. The man told the associates he tried to keep kissing her but she said no. The man told his business associates that was all that happened.

The second business associate said he took the woman’s versions of events seriously because of “past rumours and allegations”, which the man had previously denied.

He said this time they felt the evidence was “too strong” because they were being told this information by one of the man’s friends.

Defence lawyer Ron Mansfield KC, during cross-examination, suggested to the second business associate the allegations gave him an opportunity to swiftly orchestrate change to move the man aside to secure his financial interests in the businesses.

In response, the second business associate said he did not want to lose a business associate or a friend but he knew it could “blow up” and potentially damage their businesses.

The trial, which is set down for six weeks, is before Justice Layne Harvey and a jury of nine women and three men.

Justice Harvey had earlier ruled the man’s interim name suppression would be addressed after the first week of the trial. He ruled today interim name suppression would continue and would be addressed again at the end of the trial.