But the experienced solicitor has defended his performance at the crucial 2013 bail hearing, which resulted in Monis being released, declaring "I felt under siege ... I was doing the best that I could".

In a key passage of evidence at the ongoing inquest into the December 2014 siege, the solicitor said he had dealt with "hundreds" of bail applications in relation to homicide, sexual assault and fraud prior to Monis' appearance at Penrith local court on an accessory to murder charge.

The solicitor, who works for the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions but cannot be named, rejected claims by the officer in charge of the case that he failed to put important evidence before the court despite being given a letter detailing this information weeks earlier.

The letter included the fact that Monis was on bail for sending offensive messages when the murder occurred, that he represented a threat to witnesses and the community more broadly, and that he had recently regained his passport and could travel overseas.

"My best recollection is that I have not seen this document until two days ago," said the solicitor.

"I'm confident in saying I've not seen it before."

However, he conceded that he did receive an email from the officer in charge on November 21, 2013 setting out detailed evidence that Monis was a flight risk, including that he had business contacts in Malaysia.

Nevertheless when asked by the magistrate in December 2013 whether Monis was a flight risk he said "I'll have to seek instructions".

"You had information from [the officer in charge] Ms Staples in terms of a flight risk," counsel assisting the inquest Mr Gormly said on Friday.

"Yes," the solicitor replied.

"There's also information that said he was unemployed, that could go to community ties and possibly a flight risk?" Mr Gormly replied.

"Not necessarily," the solicitor replied.

The inquest heard that the solicitor had the 30-page bail application by Monis' solicitor days before the matter went to court, but provided virtually no submissions in reply and did not ask the officer in charge to provide him with any.

"Surely it was better to meet that application with a written submission?" Mr Gormly asked the solicitor.

"No I don't agree," the prosecutor replied.

'Perhaps officers at the DPP don't really have the opportunity to put written applications together?" Mr Gormly continued.

"That's correct," the witness replied.

"You don't have the resources or the time," Mr Gormly asserted.

"That's correct," the solicitor responded.

Nevertheless, the solicitor said he had "marshalled as much as I could" to oppose the granting of bail.

"I felt I was fighting a hard case and was doing the best I could."

He said he had thrown out his written notes from the bail application, but denied that he had incorrectly argued in court that there was neither a presumption in favour or against bail for an accused charged with accessory for and after the fact to murder.

The inquest continues.