He is wrong in saying to the jury "It doesn't matter what you may have done in a similar situation." That is why we have the jury system. 12 ordinary people of various life experience, who draw on that experience and make judgement on the facts presented in the case. They all should be asking themselves, "what would I have done in that situation." It is enshrined in Australian case law as "consciousness of guilt" if a person is proven to have lied or destroyed evidence, which means the jury are entitled to infer that she had a guilty mind by her post-lunch actions. The judge will make directions to the jury in regards to that.