Justice for the reputation of Ms Beverly Cooper-Flynn would require "swingeing damages", asserted Mr Garret Cooney SC, concluding his opening address in the High Court.
The well-known libel lawyer said nothing less would compensate his client for the hurt and distress of being held up as a pariah for hundreds of thousands of people, or show those in whose esteem she had fallen the allegations against her were untrue.
He was on his feet for over three hours, facing the jury, his back to the large group of journalists assembled to report on what promises to be the biggest libel trial this year.
The stakes are high. Between them the two sides have five senior counsel - two for Ms Cooper-Flynn, two for RTE and one for its co-defendant, retired farmer Mr James Howard.
There are three junior counsel involved in the case, and each side has its own solicitor. The case is expected to run for between two and three weeks, so costs will be at least £300,000. This is before any damages might arise.
So it was hardly surprising the two people at the centre of the case, Ms Cooper-Flynn and RTE's special correspondent, Charlie Bird, looked tense.
Mr Bird, in a dark suit, blue shirt and tie, stood throughout the day at the side of the crowded court beside his colleague, Mr George Lee, who had worked on the National Irish Bank story, but did not report directly on the Cooper Flynn aspect of it. He is not named in the action.
Ms Cooper-Flynn sat behind her lawyers in the body of the court. Dressed in a light brown trouser suit, wearing a gold brooch and bracelet, she was flanked by her sister, Ms Sharon Dunleavy. Her father, Mr Padraig Flynn, was not in court.
For most of the day she frowned slightly in concentration as she sat, her hands folded lightly in her lap, listening to her counsel. She smiled at Mr Cooney as he finished his submission and the court rose.
His attention was devoted to the jury of eight men and four women. Again and again he interspersed his speech with the phrase "ladies and gentlemen", as he sought to emphasise a point.
Mr Cooney sometimes digressed from his argument to draw their attention to apparently minor points - before reading a letter from Mr Charlie Bird to Ms Cooper-Flynn he said: "You might consider, ladies and gentlemen, the propriety of addressing a person by their Christian name when you are about to damage their reputation."
RTE - "an immensely powerful organisation" - had not given Ms Cooper-Flynn the time and opportunity to contact the bank and get the records that could have exonerated her, he said.
"This is the standard of journalism employed by our national broadcaster to devastate the good name of Beverly Cooper-Flynn."