Jurors in the hacking trial were urged to ignore the "downright cruelty and vitriol" surrounding the case when they consider verdicts on Rebekah Brooks.
In his closing speech, the former News International chief executive's lawyer Jonathan Laidlaw QC made a plea for them to "focus on the evidence" alone.
He invited the jury to imagine viewing the trial as a loved one in the public gallery.
"From your position as a loved one you will be all too painfully aware the case has been heard against the backdrop of significant attention from the media.
"Opinions have been expressed with views running from criticism to comment, through inaccuracy and bias, to downright cruelty and vitriol.
"From up there you would worry about the possible impact on the jury. Can anybody be independent enough, strong enough, to avoid being influenced?"
The lawyer said the prosecution had been based on "theory first, evidence later".
He said: "Every time one theory has been contradicted, you have seen the prosecution change its case - twisting and turning to try and find any way to make themselves right.
"We have seen police officers mislead in order to protect the ultimate prosecution theory in this case - Rebekah Brooks must be guilty no matter what."
The evidence showed only one story published from hacking during Brooks's time at the helm of the tabloid, he said. That was the Milly Dowler story which was published when she was on holiday in Dubai.
Brooks, 45, of Churchill, Oxfordshire, along with her six co-defendants, denies all the charges against her.
Mr Laidlaw pointed out data which showed Brooks had no contact with anyone at the NotW before Mulcaire was tasked to hack murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler's voicemails in 2002 while she was in Dubai.
He told jurors: "There is simply no evidence at all that anybody at the NotW disturbed her holiday about anything prior to April 11."
The trial continues.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article