FIVE weeks down and at least one more to go.

The High Court defamation case involving racing official Chris Gordon and the Irish Racehorse Trainers Association [IRTA] continued this week with trainer Liz Doyle in the witness stand from Tuesday to Friday.

With Ms Doyle’s mother, Avril Doyle, and IRTA chief executive Michael Grassick still due to appear as witnesses, along with summing up from both sides, informed sources believe the case will run through Cheltenham week and halfway into the following week.

Liz Doyle is seen as a key witness as much of the case revolves around an inspection of her Co Wexford stables in 2014. She claims that Gordon, the Turf Club’s head of security, attempted to “entrap” her during the visit by showing her a copy of a bank lodgement slip with her name on it, which suggested she had made a payment to John Hughes, who had earlier been found in possession of illegal anabolic steroids.

Gordon disputes this version of events and says, while the initials LD were on the original slip, he did not know at the time that the words ‘Liz Doyle?’ had been written in the margin of the copied version by Turf Club boss Denis Egan.

The Turf Club accepted Doyle’s claim that the lodgement did not refer to her but, after Doyle related details of the inspection to Noel Meade, the IRTA wrote to the Turf Club looking for a full investigation.

Gordon says the IRTA went on to mount a campaign to have him removed from office and his legal team have cited six instances where he was defamed. The IRTA denies this.

The case is being heard in front of a judge and jury. Each side has two senior counsels and solicitors, and it is believed that the total legal costs will be approximately €1.5 million.

In court on Tuesday Doyle said the document produced by Gordon during the inspection had her name clearly written on it, alongside the amount lodged. She said that, at a later date in Fairyhouse, Gordon’s assistant Declan Buckley showed her a different document with her initials on it and her name written to the side.

On Wednesday Justice Barton told the jury it was not important for them to decide which document was produced during the inspection. What mattered was what Doyle believed to be the position at the time.

Thursday’s session saw Doyle tell the court she believed Gordon had “beefed up” evidence in order to move closer to successfully bringing charges against a trainer in relation to anabolic steroids.

Cross-examined by Gordon’s senior counsel Mark Harty, Doyle said: “I think Mr Gordon had egg on his face because the Department of Agriculture had discovered a trainer, or had discovered someone, using anabolic steroids, and he had egg on his face because it was on his watch it happened, and my view of it is he was embarrassed within his job, and he beefed up evidence.

“So instead of walking down my yard with LD on a document he walked down my yard with Liz Doyle on (it), and it would get him where he wanted to be an awful lot quicker.”

Doyle’s cross-examination continued on Friday. Reiterating her conviction that her name had not appeared on the original Dept of Agriculture documents relating to the John Hughes case, Ms Doyle stated: “If my name was on the (original) document, (part of the John Hughes book of evidence), my feeling was what on earth was Mr Louis Reardon (Dept of Agriculture inspector) doing for the last year and a half? He was looking at a book of evidence with my name on it and he hasn’t come down to visit me? It just doesn’t make sense.

“The Philip Fenton case was in the media at the time. It didn’t make sense that it (a stable inspection) would take so long if my name had been on it (the original document).”

The hearing is due to resume next Tuesday morning.