The trial of a former Government architect accused of defrauding an employer continued yesterday, despite concerns from the prosecution of perceived bias.

Crown counsel Larissa Burgess had called for the trial of Kyril Burrows to be aborted last week.

She argued that acting Magistrate Shade Subair's dealings with a complainant in the case on an unrelated matter could give the defence grounds for appeal.

Burrows is accused of forging three documents with the intention of defrauding Compass Holdings of almost $10,000.

The 46-year-old has also been at the centre of a separate probe by the Police and the Auditor General over the misuse of public funds.

On Friday Burrows' lawyer Richard Horseman said he had no objection to Ms Subair acting in the trial.

However Ms Burgess made an application to have the trial aborted, saying: "There's nothing stopping the defendant from appealing on this matter that your worship sitting on this matter is biased."

Ms Burgess continued the argument in court yesterday, saying the connection between Mr. Binns and Ms Subair could also give the Crown grounds to appeal.

Ms Subair dismissed the motion. She said any linkage was minimal and that the defendant has stated under oath that he would not raise it as a point of appeal.

It is claimed by the prosecution that Burrows forged receipts and invoices to be reimbursed $9,390 for software that was never purchased.

The prosecution and the defence agree that the documents are false but disagree as to who forged the documents.

On cross-examination yesterday, Burrows acknowledged receiving $9,390 in his account from Compass Holdings.

He said the money was payment for work done in 2008 at several schools.

He repeatedly denied forging any documents, and disputed that it was his signature on the reimbursement forms

"I think it's a set-up," he said. "It's been an effort to defame my character and reputation."

Summarising her case, Ms Burgess told the court that the [Compass Holdings] complainants are reputable businessmen.

"They have nothing to gain by concocting any story," she said.

Mr. Horseman said it wasn't a matter of simply being one person's word against another.

"There is no independent evidence put forward against my client," he said. "My client has no previous offences, he is a person of good character, and he has been repeatedly requesting the financial records of this company.

"He would have to be a very dumb criminal to have them open up their financial records."

Ms Subair adjourned the trial until October 1 for her verdict.