However, they were able to reach majority verdicts for those charges as 11 of them agreed the man was guilty on each.
Judge Cathcart convicted him and scheduled sentencing for August 3.
The man believes the court has no jurisdiction over him and made that view clear throughout the court process.
He had wanted to conduct his own trial and initially refused to engage with lawyer Leighvi Maynard, who was appointed by the court as standby counsel.
But as the trial proceeded, the man made use of Mr Maynard’s help and after the verdicts said he would formally engage Mr Maynard to represent him at sentencing.
Judge Cathcart said he was pleased with the man’s decision.
The sentencing would be an unusual one as it would be based on the law as it stood at the time of the offences — the 1980s — when the man was aged in his late teens.
One of the offences was particularly serious.
The man would need Mr Maynard’s legal skills and knowledge of the case to best represent his interests.
The case rested on the complainant’s memory of the offending, which she conceded was patchy.
In closing submissions, prosecutor Lara Marshall urged the jury to accept those imperfect memories lent truth to the woman’s allegations;
Mr Maynard contended it was evidence too vague and lacking in detail for jurors to trust.
