Warning: This article discusses allegations which may be distressing to some people.
An expert witness, who worked in an organisation's medical branch, says during his time there he never performed a rectal or vaginal examination in assessments for the group.
A lower North Island doctor is accused of carrying out intimate examinations in inappropriate circumstances and is charged with acting in breach of ethical obligations and or accepted standards of practice.
The witness, who is also a doctor, told a Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal for the man he didn't think it was necessary or appropriate to perform anal inspections during the examinations.
Twelve patients who underwent assessments from the accused spoke earlier this week, with one woman alleging he put his finger in her anus and touched her vagina with his hand held "like a peace sign".
Another women claimed that the doctor had made her remain in her underwear for most of the assessment, and a man claimed he was made to lie on his side and something, potentially a finger, was allegedly inserted into his bottom.
Complaints against the doctor span from 1998 to 2006.
Today the expert witness told the Tribunal the examinations were not supposed to be diagnostic, and in any case he would offer a chaperone for any rectal or vaginal checks.
However, despite telling the hearing he didn't do the intimate examinations during the work medical assessments, he noted there was "no training in anything really", and in fact, couldn't find a document from the time about how they should go about doing the tests.
The accused doctor's lawyer Harry Waalkens said things were not clear to physicians at the time, and one document said doctors were to do what was required "in order to guarantee perfect health" of the person doing the assessment.
Waalkens argued that you can't criticise the man for his thorough approach.
The witness conceded that it was open to interpretation and reinforced that was why he was talking about "his" practice, not other people's.
He said if you had had Lance Armstrong as one of your patients in the past, you'd be "grabbing" the testicles "on all of them".
Waalken's said his client had conducted medical examinations for a different organisation in the past, and these were required to be in depth.
One document from that organisation, signed by the doctor in 1992, mentioned checking for any evidence of hernia as well as haemorrhoids, said the lawyer.
Another doctor also spoke today, and said he did not consider intimate examinations were needed in the medical assessments for the organisation.
"When I have done them [the examinations] in the past, I cannot think of any time I have asked a [person] to remove their underwear."
Earlier in the week a woman claimed she raised her alleged incident in 2005 with a person who looks after staff welfare at her workplace as well as a more senior person – however nothing came of this at the time.
Another woman claimed in 2002 she wrote of her experience in a work feedback form shortly after, but again said nothing happened.
Arguments from the defence will begin tomorrow and are expected to wrap up next week.