The prosecution case is that Foxman intended to pervert the course of justice by approaching two employees of the Imperial Hotel at the time, Louise Eschbach and Christopher Kelly, after a graphic sex show was allegedly held there in 2019.

Foxman represented himself on the fourth day of his hearing in Tamworth Local Court on Friday.

He took to the witness box and gave evidence he had sat with Mr Kelly and typed a document after the alleged sex show because he could type more than 140 words per minute.

He said he and Mr Kelly discussed the "fundamental elements" of the document.

Mr Kelly gave evidence earlier in the hearing, which ran across two days in May, that he was emailed a 10-page document by Foxman after the alleged sex show with the expectation he would sign it or face losing his job, if the hotel closed.

READ ALSO:

Police prosecutor Sergeant Jodie Westman cross-examined Foxman and asked if he had prepared the document and sent it to Mr Kelly.

"No ... that is where you are mistaken," he told the court.

Ms Eschbach gave evidence in May that she believed she had been fired for refusing to write a statement saying that Foxman was not present at the alleged sex show, where police claim graphic acts took place.

"Why would I tell someone to say I was not in the room when I knew there were eight cameras?" Foxman said, adding he had paid $47,000 to install the security cameras in the building.

He said as a business manager it was his "right to hire and fire" but said he rejected any suggestion that he "intimidated or threatened" any employee.

Foxman gave evidence he became aware a "strip show" - not sex show - was to take place at the Imperial Hotel but said it wasn't his idea.

Foxman continued to make serious allegations against the Tamworth police, the judicial system and its officers, and warned he was escalating the matter to the International Criminal Court.

He was repeatedly and sternly warned by magistrate Peter Thompson to stop talking over him and "being rude".

Foxman made further applications for a mistrial, which were refused.

He applied to cross-examine Ms Eschbach and Mr Kelly himself because his lawyer did not follow his texted instructions back in May, which Mr Thompson denied on the basis that it was not in the interest of justice.

"It is a situation where [Foxman] ... genuinely believes there is a large conspiracy against him," Mr Thompson said, adding that it appeared to extend to the Information and Privacy Commissioner and the Supreme Court of NSW.

Foxman made an application for Mr Thompson to recuse himself from the case for "apprehended bias", which was also rejected.

"If you fail to recuse yourself you will be arrested by the United Nations," Foxman said.

A solicitor briefly called into the court to indicate he would represent Foxman in some matters after Foxman fired "like 10 solicitors" for acting contrary to his instructions.

Foxman asked for his "unconstitutional" bail conditions related to his social media use and other conditions to be varied, but Mr Thompson ordered bail to continue.

Mr Thompson said he was hoping to have evidence in the hearing finalised on Friday but it proved impossible. It was again marked part-heard and adjourned to December.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: