"These sexual assaults come from not just one but two independent complainants, both saying when they were little girls when David Beamsley sexually assaulted them. Two little girls now grown women."
Mr Wilkinson-Smith said both "survivors of sexual abuse" gave evidence unshaken when they were cross-examined.
"These two complainants are utterly independent from each other, they have no connection but both experienced the similar abuse.
"This is not a coincidence, it shows a pattern of [Beamsley's] tendency to prey on young girls."
But defence lawyer Stephanie Burlace said there were a number of inconsistencies in the evidence given from both victims, making the allegations unreliable.
"[The first victim] accepted there were changes to her evidence, her memory makes her unsure."
"In 2017 [the second victim] did not know if the vivid incident was real or not...her explanation for this was she worked with her counsellor and what she thought were dreams were actually flashbacks.
"She wants you to believe what she is saying this week, because this is what she believes this week," Ms Burlace said.
Judge Philip Crayton told the jury that its decision could not be made with emotion or sympathy.
"Under New Zealand law you are required to make a decision based on the evidence before you," the judge told the jury.
The judge warned the jury to tread with caution because it was 34 years ago when the first victim's offending occurred, 37 years since the second victim's.
"You may have a different verdict for each charge."
