But the prosecutor, Margaret Cunneen, SC, said her recommendations were “fearless and independent” and had been made in the interests of the alleged victims themselves.

The royal commission into child sex abuse is examining the decision by Queensland authorities to drop nine child sex charges against Mr Volkers, following allegations that he indecently assaulted three young swimmers.

This decision followed advice from Ms Cunneen – one of NSW’s top prosecutors – who said the allegations were “relatively trivial” and that pursuing them would likely result in an acquittal, which would, in turn, erode public confidence in the judicial system.

In her advice, Ms Cunneen expressed doubt about the claim by one of the alleged victims that she had experienced an orgasm while being assaulted by Mr Volkers, stating that the teenager’s young age and the physical circumstances of the alleged assault made this “unlikely”.

She also questioned another victim’s claim to have had her breasts groped on the basis that the 12-year-old swimmers were unlikely to have breasts.

During a tense examination from counsel assisting the commission, Ms Cunneen said that these matters were not her personal opinion but factors that Mr Volkers’ lawyers were likely to point out to a jury.

But on Thursday, counsel for the victims, Andrew Boe, suggested her comments about damage being done to the justice system were simply an attempt to support her colleagues at the Queensland Director of Public Prosecutions.

“Did you add this commentary, this obiter dicta, to be protective of this earlier decision from your Queensland counterpart?” Mr Boe asked.

“No. I was looking at it purely as an independent, fearless prosecutor.”

The commission also heard that after Ms Cunneen provided her advice, Queensland barrister Russell Hanson, QC, described her orgasm comments as “too silly for words”.

“In summary, I find this second category of reasons based on non-legal considerations, irrelevant, unprofessional and just plain silly,” said Mr Hanson, who was hired by one of Mr Volkers’ victims, Julie Gilbert, to pursue a private prosecution of the coach in the Queensland Supreme Court.

Ultimately, Queensland Supreme Court judge Kate Holmes rejected the bid for a private prosecution, a point Ms Cunneen pointed out in her response to Mr Hanson’s claims.

“Yes, well, I reject that contention,” Ms Cunneen said of Mr Hanson’s criticisms.

“I’m surprised Mr Hanson has made those comments about another barrister. Mr Hanson’s advice was demonstrably wrong. Justice Kate Holmes came to the other view.”

She said that, were the case to have been pursued, Mr Volkers would almost certainly have been acquitted, leaving his alleged victims with no further avenues to pursue, even if other complainants came forward.

Later, the former NSW director of public prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery, told the commission he had read the brief of evidence against Mr Volkers and thought Ms Cunneen’s advice had been correct.

“I thought it addressed the issues upon which advice had been sought and … was soundly based,” said Mr Cowdery, who had asked Ms Cunneen to complete the advice.

The hearing continues.