Journalist Ian Bailey, who says he was wrongly arrested on suspicion of the murder of Frenchwoman Sophie Toscan du Plantier in west Cork in 1996, has denied exaggerating about his early career as a journalist.
He is being cross-examined at the High Court for a second day.
Mr Bailey, who is 57, and from the Prairie, Schull in west Cork, is suing the Garda Commissioner, Minister for Justice and the Attorney General for damages.
Mr Bailey is being questioned about the evidence he gave last week about his early career as a journalist.
Senior Counsel Luán Ó Braonáin said Mr Bailey had told the jury he was inspired to go into journalism at the age of 14 when he read a book about the Watergate scandal.
However, Mr Ó Braonáin said the Watergate affair had not happened at that stage and the book, All the President's Men, would not have been published until Mr Bailey was almost 18.
He said this created a wrong impression for the jury.
Mr Bailey said he may have been mistaken about the exact age he was when he read the book, but it was some time in his teens.
Mr Ó Braonáin also questioned Mr Bailey about his description of himself as a correspondent for a newspaper when in fact he was a freelance "stringer".
He said he also claimed to have written one or two exclusives a week for a Sunday paper while working in Cheltenham, but there was no evidence of this.
Instead, he said they were simply stories that would have been widely reported upon.
Mr Bailey said he had not kept all his cuttings from those years, but could bring other journalists with whom he had worked to give evidence about the work he did.
Mr Ó Braonáin said Mr Bailey had last week claimed to have had a "bumper year" as a journalist in 1982 to 1983 yet there was no evidence of this in his scrap book of articles.
It was put to Mr Bailey that his claim of earning Stg£30,000 from journalism in 1982 was unsubstantiated.
Mr Ó Braonáin said Mr Bailey would have had to have hundreds of page lead articles published to accumulate such fees.
Mr Bailey said many "small sums mount up" but when pressed further for evidence of his earnings he said he had come to court to prosecute garda corruption.
Mr Ó Braonáin told him not to try to change the subject because the subject was uncomfortable.
Mr Bailey said he could only say what he had earned as he did not retain all his cuttings from that time but he accepted he could not substantiate the figure.
Mr Bailey was told by lawyers for the defence that the point of his case was not about whether or not he was involved in the killing of Ms du Plantier.
Under cross-examination, Mr Ó Braonáin said whether or not Mr Bailey was right or wrong about his allegations concerning wrongful arrest did not require a decision on whether or not he was involved in the killing.
Mr Bailey said he would not agree because he was falsely framed.
Mr Ó Braonáin said anyone could say they should not have been a suspect because they did not do it.
However, he said the question of guilt or innocence was not what determines whether or not someone becomes a suspect. Rather it is a question of the information available.
Mr Bailey replied only if that information was bona fide and not concocted.
Mr Ó Braonáin said there were many categories in a garda investigation from a person of interest, to a suspect to an accused person right up to an acquittal or conviction.
Mr Bailey agreed but said people should only become suspects if it was based on solid information, not concocted information.
Earlier, it was put to Mr Bailey that he had given a false impression about a job he had in fish factory in Cork in the early 1990s.
Mr Ó Braonáin said he had told the jury he was appointed a foreman and that the job came with a house.
However, Mr Ó Braonáin said Mr Bailey's job was not that of a foreman, it was to clean out fish boxes and the house he had referred to was shared accommodation or "digs" with other workers.
