The corruption trial of former Fine Gael councillor Fred Forsey Jr has been told he made 48 calls to a property developer the same day his former wife threatened to go to the gardaí about payments he received from the developer.
It also heard evidence the documents purporting to be loan documents were not created in the same year as the defendant is claiming.
Mr Forsey Jr denies six counts of receiving corrupt payments in 2006 totaling €80,000, which the State says he got to help get lands near Dungarvan rezoned for the developer.
The trial at Waterford Circuit Court heard earlier in the week that if the rezoning had gone through, it would have increased the value of the lands at least ten fold.
This morning Detective Sergeant Shay Keevans gave evidence of how he obtained Mr Forsey's mobile phone records.
It showed that four calls were made between the developer and Mr Forsey on 24 and 25 August 2006 and the court was told €60,000 was transferred to Mr Forsey's account on the later date.
On 9-10 October of that year, nine calls were made, with €10,000 being lodged then, and that on 22 December 2006, 49 calls and one text message were made between the two men.
Mr Forsey, a former deputy mayor of Dungarvan, called the developer 48 times and sent one text and the developer rang him back once that day.
That was the same day a further €10,000 was lodged into Mr Forsey's account, the court heard, and the same day that his former wife Jenny had told him she would go to the gardaí about his dealings with the developer.
Defence counsel for Mr Forsey says all the phone calls show his client was desperate for money and he received a loan from the developer.
Mr Forsey has told gardaí that the payments were not corruptly given to him by the developer.
Detective Keevans also told gardaí that he got orders to examine, with garda computer experts, the computer mainframe in a Dublin solicitor's firm, whom he said were very helpful.
He said seven documents were examined, one purporting to be a loan agreement from 20 August 2006 which he said the computer showed was only created on 9 January 2007 at 5.06pm.
And another document again supposed to be from the same day was created, computer records say, on 10 June 2008.
Defence counsel say these documents could have been put on those computers from a memory stick.
The trial continues.