During gruelling cross examination by prosecutor David Bright at Oxford Crown Court today (Friday), defendant Ian Holland appeared to repeatedly contradict his earlier evidence.

The inaccuracies and falterings prompted Mr Bright to declare it was Mr Holland who had attacked Adam Dickson on the driveway of his parents' Adderbury home in the early hours of June 17 last year for wrongly believing he was dating Mr Holland's former partner, Lisa Cebral.

He said: "I make it quite clear if it is not already plain to you that you attacked him (Mr Dickson] and you left him there because you wanted him to die.

"You had in the past threatened to kill any new boyfriend of Lisa hadn't you?"

In a defence case statement given in May this year, Mr Holland said he did not know Mr Dickson.

However in court on Thursday, Mr Holland appeared to have changed his mind, saying he had known the victim "for years" as they had lived in the same village and shared the bus to school as teenagers.

Mr Holland had been accused of repeatedly calling Ms Cebral after she returned home with Mr Dickson following an evening out.

But during Friday's hearing, Mr Holland told the court he had loaned his mobile phone handset to friend David Parker just hours before the assault, claiming he kept his own SIM card and inserted Mr Parker's SIM card into the handset instead.

However he later altered his story, telling the court Mr Parker's SIM card had been inserted into Mr Holland's handset two days earlier than first stated.

"You have been lying through your teeth about this mobile phone, haven't you," said Mr Bright.

Discrepancies also arose surrounding Mr Holland's mobile phone handset, which was found in the Fringford garden where he was arrested last year.

Mr Holland said he had given the handset to his pal David Parker at about 2am on the morning of the attack, which took place at 3.15am.

However when it came to clarifying details about the SIM card inside the phone, Mr Holland's story began to show discrepancies.

Initially he said when lending Mr Parker his handset, he had removed his SIM card and Mr Parker had inserted his own into the mobile phone at 2am.

However when an analysis of the phone showed only one SIM card had been used in the handset, Mr Holland then claimed Mr Parker's SIM card had been in the phone since two days before.

He said the pair regularly shared the handset and SIM cards and all calls made after 2am on the morning of the attack - including three to Miss Cebral - had been made by Mr Parker.

"I didn't have the phone in the early hours of June 17," said Mr Holland.

"David Parker had the phone on June 17. He picked it up between 1am and 2am from my brother's address as David (Parker] had a SIM but no phone."

Mr Bright questioned whether Mr Parker had ever been in possession of the phone, pointing out the record of calls and text messages made after 2am showed they were to friends and acquaintances of Mr Holland, not Mr Parker.

It included a text message sent to Mr Holland's friend Tom Smith at 3.30am and at 4.03am the phone was used to contact Mr Holland's brother David.

A call was also made to Mr Holland's mother sometime after he claimed he handed over the handset.

Mr Bright also mentioned three calls made to Miss Cebral's landline less than an hour before the attack.

But Mr Holland said of the calls: "It must have been David Parker."

Mr Bright replied: "You're just putting the blame on an innocent man aren't you?"

Earlier, Mr Bright questioned Mr Holland's hearing impediment, which has required him to have all evidence repeated through lipspeakers.

He said he had seen Mr Holland talking with friends without any lipspeakers, which had also not been present during his police questioning.

Mr Bright asked: "Is there any possibility you are having trouble with the lipspeaker in court because you are buying yourself time to think?"

"No," answered Mr Holland. "I've got to take in the question which takes me a bit longer because I'm deaf."

If you are reading a question out and I can't hear I can't give you a quick answer."

The court was also shown CCTV footage of Mr Holland in Banbury the morning of the attack. Between 3.56am and 4.22am Mr Holland was seen on various cameras walking around the town, including passing Banbury Police Station on two occasions as he went to a nearby petrol station.

Mr Holland is charged with the attempted murder of Adam Dickson and causing grievous bodily harm with intent. He denies both charges.

The trial continues.