URBANA — A Champaign County jury took just over an hour Thursday to find that a former University of Illinois student illegally entered the Campustown apartments of two women as they slept, fondling one and sexually assaulting the other in the fall of 2014.

Despite countless attempts by Paul Rouse to derail his trial, first by insisting on representing himself, then later demanding an attorney, Judge Heidi Ladd sent the case to the jury about 4:35 p.m. They had their guilty verdicts about 5:50 p.m., declining an offer of dinner.

"You cannot stop these proceedings by playing this game," a patient but firm Ladd told the 26-year-old from Schaumburg earlier in the afternoon.

Rouse's jury trial on four counts of home invasion, two counts of criminal sexual assault and two counts of criminal sexual abuse started with jury selection Tuesday morning and wrapped up Thursday night with his conviction on all counts.

After the verdict, Rouse indicated that he planned to hire an attorney, so Ladd set a hearing for Tuesday for that person to show up.

Whenever he's sentenced, Rouse faces a maximum of 60 years in prison.

Just after the jury had been excused for lunch Thursday, Rouse told Ladd he wanted the help of a lawyer. By that time, he had called three witnesses in his case.

"At this moment, I feel like I'm overwhelmed. And pursuant to the Sixth Amendment, I'd request counsel," Rouse said.

Without skipping a beat, Ladd, who's been a judge for 16 years and was a prosecutor for about 19 years prior to that, denied the request.

"The court could not have made it more abundantly clear than it did, over and over and over, that this was a foolish enterprise to embark on by representing yourself," Ladd said.

"The court admonished you last week on Dec. 30 and this Monday, on Jan. 4, that you would not be permitted to change your mind in mid-trial, you would not be permitted to hire an attorney in the middle of the trial, and you would not have stand-by counsel to assist you during the trial. The court again emphasized over and over to you that this is the posture you were in.

"In fact, the court found that this was a manipulative and dilatory tactic, which I believe it continues to be, and that it was one that the court would recommend you not take, and you chose to do it. You did it open-eyed, knowingly, voluntarily, and that was your choice," Ladd said.

After lunch, when Ladd inquired of Rouse if he intended to testify, he responded: "I will not proceed further without representation," a phrase he repeated so often that Ladd was moved to say it was not a "magical incantation" that would get him a lawyer or a mistrial.

"He is willfully trying to derail these proceedings. A defendant cannot cause a mistrial by his own behavior," Ladd said, clearly talking for the benefit of the appellate court justices who will undoubtedly review the case.

The case against Rouse — the second of three criminal cases against him alleging sexual assaults of women on campus — stemmed from incidents involving two college-age women who were asleep in their respective apartments at 309 E. Green St., C, in the early morning hours of Oct. 11, 2014.

Rouse was acquitted in October of four counts of criminal sexual assault alleging that on Jan. 17 or 18, 2014, he sodomized and vaginally penetrated a woman he'd met hours earlier while drinking at a campus bar. He faces another case charging him with criminal sexual assault for allegedly raping an intoxicated woman at a campus apartment on Aug. 26, 2014.

In the case tried this week, Rouse was accused of entering the unlocked apartment of one woman on the 19th floor of the high-rise, slipping into her bed and fondling her, then going to apartment of a second woman on the 22nd floor, slipping in behind her in her bed as her boyfriend slept on her other side. That woman reported she was sexually assaulted.

Both women testified they had been out drinking at campus bars prior to being assaulted and were awakened by the sexual advances. Both women also identified Rouse as the man who made those advances. The second woman's boyfriend also identified Rouse as the man in the apartment.

Assistant State's Attorney Matt Banach also presented an abundance of surveillance camera footage showing Rouse going to those floors and later leaving them.

A former resident of the Green Street high-rise, Rouse was living at 907 S. Third St. at the time of the assaults. The state also had surveillance footage showing him returning to his own apartment building early that day, then leaving shortly after in different clothing.

Although articulate and polite, it was obvious Rouse lacked the legal training to get in the evidence he wanted the jury to hear, namely that his DNA was not found in the woman who testified she was penetrated.

Banach rested his case at mid-morning Thursday after testimony from two state crime lab analysts, one of whom said a stain extracted from the bedsheet of the first woman who was fondled was not semen.

However, forensic scientist Corey Formea said the substance could have been lubricant, dried saliva or sweat.

And Dana Pitchford, the scientist who examined that sample, said it contained DNA that matched Rouse's DNA profile, which would be expected to occur in "1 in 3.2 quintillion African-Americans, 1 in 37 quintillion Caucasians or 1 in 910 quintillion Southwest Hispanic unrelated individuals."

When Rouse tried to cross-examine Pitchford on whether his DNA was found on the other alleged victim, Banach objected, Ladd ruled in his favor, and Rouse asked no further questions.

Then, in his own defense, Rouse began by questioning Christine Meeker, the certified sexual assault nurse examiner who collected evidence for the sex assault kit on the second woman at the Carle Hospital emergency room.

Meeker testified she found two abrasions in the woman's genital area indicative of "blunt force trauma" but in answer to a Rouse question, said they could have come from consensual sex.

Rouse then called Sara Connor of Champaign, who said she knew Rouse because they "used to be intimate" for about two years.

After asking her about the ambiance of the Red Lion bar and the reputation of 309 E. Green St., C, for having a lot of parties, Rouse then asked her one final question.

"Would you say I'm well-endowed?" he asked.

"Yes," she replied.

That was the last testimony the jury heard.

Banach gave a 25-minute closing argument, reminding the jury of the women's identifications of Rouse and the surveillance footage. He made no mention of the DNA evidence.

Rouse refused to respond to Banach's closing argument, yawning frequently during the last couple of hours of the courtroom proceedings.