If Henri van Breda is fabricating a narrative around a phantom attacker in his home‚ the state prosecutor is not buying it — and his own nerves aren’t really coping.

In the High Court on Thursday‚ Van Breda — who stands accused of axing his parents and brother to death — was asked by prosecutor Susan Galloway to re-enact the alleged attack on him that took place after members of his family had been slaughtered.

He claims a black man in a balaclava is behind the attacks‚ and that he was the one who disarmed the “laughing” assailant.

An official of the court‚ judged to be of the same build of the alleged attacker described by Van Breda‚ was asked to play the man’s part.

With smooth choreography‚ Van Breda directed the other “actor”‚ giving precise details of spaces‚ directions of arm twists‚ and when and how he should move his head to the left or right.

It was during this alleged scuffle in the family home in January 2015 that Van Breda says he acquired cuts on his upper torso. After the re-enactment‚ a clearly discombobulated Van Breda told Judge Siraj Desai he needed to go and “splash some water on his face” — but not before Galloway had poured cold water over his story.

“What I find difficult to believe is that this person who has just now viciously attacked at least your brother and your father is now coming towards you to attack you. You say he is still armed with the same axe and he is laughing similarly to when he attacked your father‚” she said.

Somehow‚ though‚ Van Breda “easily disarms the man” and manages to “chase him out the house”.

Van Breda said he was also “surprised by how easily I was able to take the axe out of his hand”.

Galloway pointed out: “He doesn’t seem to come at you in any way with any strength. He could easily come and stab you in the heart in that first movement.”

Van Breda said: “He was trying his best to hurt me.”

Galloway: “And yet all he manages to inflict on you are the wounds that are described as very superficial and definitely not fatal?”

Van Breda said he was “fighting for his life” yet sustained “no defensive wounds”‚ but when asked straight-out about his wounds being self-inflicted‚ since they were described as classic “textbook” images of such‚ he said: “I recall that evidence and refute it. I didn’t self-inflict any harm to myself.”

Galloway also grilled him for claiming he pulled a knife from his flesh with the hand in which he allegedly held the axe‚ rather than the other hand which‚ according to his detailed description‚ would have been “empty at that time”.

She then moved on to his claims of chasing the attacker out the house. Why didn’t he help? Why didn’t he warn the two women in the house‚ his mother Teresa and sister Marli?

“I was scared”‚ he said. “I didn’t think about it.”

Later‚ after the women had been attacked too‚ Galloway said Van Breda “suddenly finds the courage to follow [his] attacker”.

She also poked holes in a timeline that in one statement had him seeing his mother and sister lying attacked outside the room‚ and not seeing them at all in another version of the story.

He explained this difference by saying‚ “I saw them lying there‚ but I didn’t process it.”

Galloway asked him: “Why is it not in your statement to the police that you caught a glimpse of your mom and sister before following your attacker?”

According to Van Breda‚ this was a mistake made by the police officer who took down his statement.

But Galloway wanted to know why‚ if this is how it played out‚ neither he nor the attacker fell over Marli’s feet‚ which were ostensibly right outside the bedroom door.

“You would have been aware of your mother and sister being attacked as you would have had to climb over them‚” she said.

The case continues.

WATCH: Highlights from the Van Breda trial