Vaughan's lawyer Christopher Stoner KC concludes his questioning of England spinner Adil Rashid.

ECB lawyer Jane Mulcahy KC has no questions for Rashid.

Rashid's video evidence has finished and there will now be a break for lunch.

Image source, Getty

Stoner asks if Rashid's favoured method of communicating with Rafiq is by WhatsApp. Rashid says yes, and adds "phone calls".

He agrees with Stoner that WhatsApp is an important channel of communication between him and his friends.

Stoner says that "guessing what Rafiq has been through", Rashid would want to "support him and keep up to date with him". "Yes, that's true," Rashid says.

Stoner says there therefore must be WhatsApp messages between the them relating to the allegations made. "No there isn't," says Rashid.

"Not one single WhatsApp relating to this matter?" Stoner asks. Rashid asks for clarification on which matter Stoner is referring to.

"Not one single WhatsApp on the allegation relating to Michael Vaughan?". "No."

"Not one single WhatsApp with George Dobell regarding the allegation against Michael Vaughan?". "No."

We are now shown correspondence between solicitors, namely a letter from the ECB lawyers answering questions from those representing Vaughan.

In the letter, confirmation is requested that Rashid searched his exchanges with Rafiq for messages involving Vaughan, the allegation or the 2009 game in question. After a question from Stoner, Rashid says he searched for Vaughan's name.

The letter also shows Rashid changed his phone. "I change regularly, I like to do that." Rashid also confirms he keeps the same number each time he changes his phone.

Asked if he had WhatsApp backed up in the letter, Rashid said he believes "some but not all" messages are backed up. He says he deletes some messages and these are not kept.

Stoner asks Rashid if it is possible he deleted messages relating to the allegations involving Vaughan.

"I delete a lot of messages," Rashid replies, adding it is "sometimes the natural thing to do" and pointing out that he deletes messages from his family too.

Stoner asks about the business having been opened a month before Rashid gave his statement to journalist George Dobell in The Cricketer.

Rashid replies by saying the business was "way before any of this started" and "way before" the Rafiq case came out in the public.

Stoner points to the statement saying October 2021 to October 2022 and suggest Rashid's recollection of the timing is wrong.

Rashid: "No, we opened then but a year prior to that is when we signed contracts and got the keys." He adds that though they opened in October 2021 it was a year before that they started to get everything ready.

Stoner again asks about why those dates are in his statement.

Rashid says "all the negotiations were done" before the Rafiq case became public.

Stoner posits that 'business interest' is not just the actual opening of the shop, it's the whole business venture.

Rashid says "it can be" but that "it takes time before opening a shop".

Stoner: "When did business interest actually start?"

Rashid: "A year before then."

Stoner: "October 2020?"

Rashid: "No, probably earlier than that. Maybe July time. Maybe June."

Stoner notes that is about the same time Rafiq spoke to Wisden and the allegations came out.

Rashid says that is was "before then" and "before everything".

Stoner suggests Rashid cannot recollect when the business venture started.

Rashid: "I recollect it was before anything came out and anything was out in public."

Stoner refers to Rashid's reply witness statement that he submitted a few weeks ago.

It states: "Ajmal also speculates that I may have felt under pressure to support Azeem because of a shared business interest which we had in a fish and chip shop.

"This was the only 'business interest' which we had. It started and ended within a matter of months, from approximately October 2021 to October 2022."

Stoner asks if it is right Rashid became involved in a business with Rafiq in October 2021.

Rashid: "That is when the fish and chip shop opened. Yes."

Stoner: "You supplied capital to that business?"

Rashid: "Yes."

Stoner: "Would you describe yourself as a business partner of Rafiq in that business?"

Rashid: "Silent partner."

Stoner: "Was the plan for you get your money back at any point?

Rashid: "The plan was to get the business up and running and going well but that unfortunately didn't work. People do business to make money."

Michael Vaughan's lawyer Christopher Stoner KC goes back to discussing the statement Rashid released through George Dobell and The Cricketer in November 2021. Stoner asks if he is right in thinking there were drafts of the statement passed between Rashid and Dobell.

Rashid says no documents were passed between the pair.

Stoner goes back to the discussion about pressure. We are shown a transcript of Azeem Rafiq 's interview with law firm Squire Patton Boggs for the Yorkshire investigation, and the part where Rafiq said Rashid had a "memory failure".

Rafiq then said: "I just hope there's no lies, that's all I've said to someone like Adil, I've said look, as long as you don't lie, I can live with it if you want to sit on the fence, but ultimately if you lie then it's going to become a really uncomfortable postiion for everyone."

Stoner asks Rashid if he was pressured by that. Rashid replies: "No, I wasn't pressured by Azeem".

After a short break, the questioning of Rashid continues.

Stoner refers to a statement from Matthew Wood, who was Rashid's personal development manager at the Professional Cricketers' Association.

Wood stated he went to clubs in his region to ask all PCA members about whether they had experiences of racism in cricket in light of the allegations against Yorkshire.

He added that he called Rashid and asked him if there was any racism he had experience or witnessed in his career. Rashid said he hadn't.

Stoner asks Rashid about that conversation.

Rashid: "I cannot recall the conversation because we speak to so many people." He adds he can't recall speaking those words to Wood.

Stoner asks whether Rashid discussed the allegations against Vaughan with Wood.

Rashid: "I did not speak to him about this."

Stoner asks Rashid if he was pressured by anyone to give his statement to Dobell and The Cricketer? "No, I wasn't pressured at all."

Stoner then asks if Rafiq at any point threatened to report him to the ECB for anything, or if Rashid was reminded of anything he might be reported to the ECB about. Rashid answers no to both.

We are then shown the transcript of the ECB interview with Ajmal Shahzad.

In it, Shahzad said "I spoke to Rashid in December when I was at Yorkshire coaching and he was very uncomfortable with where this was going. He wanted to nip it in the bud sooner rather than later because quite frankly he was uncomfortable with how much Rafiq knew about Adil."

Stoner asks Rashid if he has any recollection of this conversation with Shahzad. "No."

Shahzad continued in the interview to say: "And at that at some point [Rafiq] was capable of, you know, using something that he knew about [Rashid] personally against him."

Stoner asks Rashid if he can remember that conversation? "Not that conversation, no," says Rashid.

In the interview, Shahzad goes on to say he is "putting two and two together" and thinks "Adil is being pressurised".

We go to Rashid's witness statement, in which he referred to Shahzad's suggestion in his ECB interview. In his statement, Rashid said he does not agree that Rafiq 'knew' anything about him.

"I didn't feel pressured by Azeem. I did feel pressured by the situation generally," he said his statement.

He again says yes when asked if Neto was mistaken in her recollections of their phone conversations.

Stoner asks if Rashid discussed the allegations or racism generally with his player development manager, Matthew Wood, from the PCA. "No."

"Were you asked by the PCA if you have experienced any racism in cricket?," Stoner asks. Rashid replies: "I think we had meetings and chats in groups generally speaking about this issue."

Stoner asks why Rashid did not put the words that he recollected Vaughan allegedly saying in his statement.

"The words were already out in the open," replies Rashid.

Stoner put its to Rashid it is "odd wording" to confirm someone else's recollection.

"Whatever it says there in my statement," says Rashid. "It's very simple to read."

Stoner asks which recollection Rashid had in mind.

"The comment made by Michael Vaughan," replies Rashid.

Stoner asks Rashid: "What were the words, remind me?"

Rashid: "You already know what the words are sir - 'there's too many of you lot'."

Stoner: "Anything else?"

Rashid: "There's too many, something needs to be done about it." He then adds: "Or, 'we need to have a word'".

Stoner says the "words in this case are important" and that is "not actually what you said that you recollected".

Rashid says that whether it was "we need to have a word" or "we need to do something about it", the part "there's too many of you lot" is still there.

Stoner says the words are "critical" because on their own "you lot" could be about batters or bowlers and then that's "not a problem".

Rashid again refers to what's in his statement.

Stoner: "Here and now, what do you say were the words spoken on that day?"

Rashid: "There's too many of you lot, we need to do something about it."

Stoner: "That's your recolleciton here and now. Is that correct?"

Rashid: "Yes."

Stoner: "Because just so you're aware that is not what is alleged against Michael Vaughan. It is 'there are too many of you lot, we need to have a word about it'."

Stoner then puts it to Rashid that he has "no clear recollection of what was said".

Rashid: "I have a very clear recollection."

Stoner now brings up an article by George Dobell in The Cricketer headlined: "Adil Rashid corroborates Azeem Rafiq's claims against Michael Vaughan".

In it there is a statement from Rashid about becoming involved in Rafiq's claim against Vaughan.

Stoner asks how the statement came about and Rashid says it was from talking to Dobell.

"Was that statement drafted for you," asks Stoner.

"What do you mean for me?" replies Rashid.

"Did you write down those words?" asks Stoner.

"Yes," says Rashid.

Stoner: "Did Mr Rafiq tell you you had to make that statment?"

Rashid: "No."

Stoner asks how he sent the statement to Dobell.

Rashid says he spoke to Dobell and "it was as simple as let's get the statement out there".

Stoner asks if he saw a draft before the statement went out.

Rashid says he "must've gone through it a few times and sent it over to him".

We are shown a claim by Rafiq in the employment tribunal in which the allegation against Vaughan is highlighted. Stoner asks Rashid if he was asked to provide a statement in the employment tribunal proceedings. Rashid says no.

Stoner points out that Rashid first made a statement on 15 November 2021, "well over a year" after Rafiq's allegations were first made.

In Rashid's statement, he said he gave the statement because "Michael was denying making that comment, so I felt I needed to put out a statement making clear that I had heard it too".

Rashid tells Stoner he "said his piece" after Vaughan denied the allegation. Rashid says it wasn't connected to Rafiq's appearance before the DCMS the following day.

Stoner asks Rashid whether the law firm Squire Patton Boggs engaged with him during its investigation into Rafiq's claims.

Rashid said he was "asked a few things from Yorkshire, maybe Squire Patton Boggs, but I didn't get involved".

Stoner asks if he had an interview with SPB.

"No," says Rashid.

Stoner: "Did you refuse to have an interview?"

Rashid: "I think I refused to get involved from the very beginning."

Stoner brings up an article about Azeem Rafiq in Wisden, published in August 2020 and asks if Adil Rashid was aware of it.

"I may have read it," says Rashid.

Stoner then refers to Rashid's witness statement and points out a part where Rashid says he discussed the alleged comment by Vaughan with "close friends" about "two or three" weeks before the publication of that article in which the allegation against Vaughan was first made public.

Rashid is asked what "close friends" means and he says: "Close friends from back home, where I live". Stoner asks if "close friends" would include Rafiq himself. "Yes," replies Rashid.

Stoner asks how it would've come up and Rashid says, "General chit chat" about cricket and "the conversation just came up".

We are shown part of Azeem Rafiq's witness statement. Stoner points to a section in which: "I have discussed this incident with Adil and he remembers it as well."

Rashid now says he was confused by Stoner's earlier questioning about whether he had spoken with Rafiq, saying the questioning "wasn't very clear". Stoner apologises.

Rashid admits he had various phone calls with Neto. He says it was around the time the allegations of racism were made public.

He says he did not say to Neto what she alleged. "She's confused."

Stoner says to Rashid that he's not been asked to corroborate any other statement apart from regarding Vaughan's alleged comment.

Rashid asks for clarity.

Stoner then asks whether Rashid was asked by Rafiq whether he remember any other particular comment.

Rashid: "No, I was not asked."

Stoner says that therefore the alleged comment by Vaughan was the "only comment" Rashid was asked to recall.

"Asked by who?," says Rashid.

"Mr Rafiq," says Stoner.

"I was not asked by Mr Rafiq to recall anything," says Rashid.

He adds that he and Rafiq "have not talked about this comment" and that he "didn't ask".

Stoner refers back to Rafiq's interview with SPB about Rashid's "memory loss" and asks whether Rafiq asked Rashid about the comment at Trent Bridge at all.

"No he hasn't," replies Rashid.

We are now shown the witness statement of Yorkshire CCC employee Liz Neto. In it, she says when the media furore was at "its zenith", Rashid phoned her on more than one occasion.

She says he appeared "distressed" and indicated to her that he was being pressured to corroborate the allegations of racism being made.

She says Rashid told her he'd told Azeem Rafiq "no matter how many times you tell me I heard it Azeem, I cannot remember hearing it".

Rashid tells Stoner he did not say that to Neto.

Stoner is referrring to a transcript of an interview with Azeem Rafiq as part of the Squire Patton Boggs investigation on 13 November 2020.

In it, Rafiq says he is in regular contact with Rashid but that Rashid has had a "memory failure".

Stoner puts it to Rashid that at that stage he had no recollection of the alleged event in 2009.

Stoner says that it means that at that stage Rashid was telling Rafiq he had no memory of the event. He asks: "Is that correct?"

Rashid: "No."

Stoner refers Rashid back to his witness statement. In it, he stated Vaughan had said the alleged words in a "joking manner", was "not trying to be offensive" and that it was a "poor attempt at humour". Rashid also stated he was not offended and did not consider what was allegedly said to be an issue.

After being questioned by Stoner, Rashid says there was no discussion about the alleged comment on the pitch or after the game.

Stoner asks who Rashid's closest friends were in the team at the time. He answers Ajmal Shahzad but added he "generally tends to be quite close to everybody".

Going back to the witness statement, Stoner picks him up on a point where he says the most ever said on the matter regarding Vaughan's alleged comment outside of his official statement was in conversations with close friends, in which Rashid was asked if he remembered it being said and he said yes. The witness statement says this was around two/three weeks before allegations were made in the press or public.

Stoner asks do you actually have an independent recollection of what was said by Vaughan? Rashid says yes.

Stoner then asks Rashid to remind him of what he heard Vaughan say. Rashid says: "There's too many of you lot, we need to have a word."

Stoner is asking Rashid about where Azeem Rafiq, Ajmal Shahzad, Rana Naved-ul-Hasan and Michael Vaughan were in relation to him in the pre-match huddle. Rashid says he can't recall where they all, whether to his left or right, but adds that everyone was close together because they were in the huddle.

Rashid says he remembers Vaughan saying the alleged comment "as soon as the huddle broke off" and players were going to their fielding positions.

Stoner asks Rashid if he was looking at Vaughan when they words were being spoken and Rashid says, "Yes".

Rashid is asked where he was in relation to Vaughan at that point and Rashid says that when Vaughan allegedly said, "I heard it and turned to face him".

Stoner suggests he would've been looking out to the pitch instead and Rashid says: "Not really, no".

Stoner is asked if he can recall who was captain that day and Rashid replies: "I think it was Mr Rudolph".

Jacques Rudolph is listed as Yorkshire's captain for the T20 against Nottinghamshire on 22 June 2009., external

A clip of the Sky footage of 22 June 2009 is now being played. Vaughan is shown talking with a number of his Yorkshire team-mates, including the four Asian players to which the allegation is related. The match pundits are speaking over the footage.

Stoner asks Rashid if, when playing, you know if the game is being broadcast live? Rashid says yes.

The lawyer asks if you know when a particular camera is broadcasting live or not? He says you do not know. "You could be [live]", Rashid says.

Towards the end of that clip, Rashid is pictured with Tim Bresnan, "joking with him", as Stoner puts it.

He says to Rashid "there is no suggestion from that footage that you had been offended by anything?" Rashid says no, he had not been offended.