Bishop, 52, denies murdering two nine-year-old girls, Karen Hadaway and Nicola Fellows, in Wild Park, Brighton, in October 1986.
On Monday, November 26, he was cross examined by prosecutor Brian Altman, QC, for about 90 minutes.
At one point during a heated exchange with prosecutor Brian Altman QC on Monday, November 26, Bishop turned to the judge, Mr Justice Nigel Sweeney QC, and asked: "Is that legal?"
The judge told him it was and he would have to answer Mr. Altman's questions.
Defendant 'Declines to Give More Evidence'
Just after the lunch adjournment Mr. Justice Sweeney told the jury Bishop had "declined to give any more evidence".
"I will give you directions in due course as to how you should treat this," the judge told the jury, before adjourning the case until Tuesday, November 27.
Bishop was acquitted of the murders in 1987 and said he endured a three year "hate campaign" before he was arrested and jailed for life for an attack on a seven-year-old girl in 1990.
Recap: Russell Bishop — accused of murdering two Brighton schoolgirls 32 years ago — declines to give any further evidence.— Helena Lee (@BBCHelenaLee) 26 November 2018
The 52-year-old spent less than an hour and a half under cross- examination this morning in the witness box.
On Friday, November 23, Bishop told the trial his house had been firebombed, his car had been set on fire and the brake cables on his vehicle had been cut several times between 1987 and 1990.
Bishop claimed he even contemplated taking his own life and that of his children by jumping from the clifftop at Beachy Head, a notorious suicide spot in East Sussex.
Mr. Altman began his cross examination by asking Bishop whether he had reconsidered his evidence over the weekend or whether he stood by everything he said.
Bishop, balding and bespectacled and wearing a beige sweatshirt and anorak, said he did not wish to change any of his evidence.
"Did you tell the jury any lies on Friday?" asked Mr Altman.
"No, I don't believe so," replied Bishop, who is currently serving a life sentence for the 1990 attack but will be eligible for parole soon.
Chilling notes from paedophile Russell Bishop to schoolgirl are heard in trial over murders of nine-year-old friends https://t.co/tnVudnyymU— Daily Mail U.K. (@DailyMailUK) 22 November 2018
Mr Altman then asked him what his motivation was for the attack on the girl in February 1990.
"You have said you thought you could see a sad, sick, misplaced revenge element in what you did?" asked Mr Altman.
"Yes, no doubt," said Bishop, who was convicted of kidnap, sexual assault and attempted murder after he put the girl in the boot of his car, drove 14 miles to woods at Devil's Dyke and sexually assaulted and strangled the girl, who survived.
Bishop Claims He 'Lost It' After Hurting His Hand
Bishop has claimed he attacked the girl after hurting his hand with a spanner while repairing the brake cables on his car, which was the last straw which made him "lose it" and that she was simply targeted because she was nearby when it happened..
"You are deeply ashamed of what you have done?" asked Mr Altman.
"Correct. I have always been deeply ashamed," replied Bishop, who has admitted lying at the 1990 trial.
Bishop said he now accepts he did kidnap and sexually assault the girl but maintains he was not guilty of attempted murder and said he had appealed against that conviction.
"This was all about getting out, wasn't it?" asked Mr Altman.
"Who wants to stay in prison? I don't," replied Bishop.
"I don't have any sexual interest in children," added Bishop later.
Babes in the Wood suspect 'kidnapped girl in revenge' https://t.co/AnhAbKskyJ— CourtNewsUK (@CourtNewsUK) 26 November 2018
"You said you had endured three years of harassment and you pulled your car over and the girl just appeared?" asked Mr. Altman.
"Not quite," replied Bishop.
"You lost it?" asked Mr Altman.
"Yes," Bishop replied.
"It was all about revenge?" asked Mr Altman
"Partly, yeah," replied Bishop.
"It was born of revenge by virtue of the three years of a hate campaign that you and your family had suffered?" asked Mr Altman.
Bishop claimed Mr Altman was taking words out of context from the prison reports.
"I can bring those other reports to the court tomorrow and blow you out of the water and make you look like a f***ing idiot," Bishop told Mr Altman.
Bishop Explains Why His DNA Was On Victim
Bishop denied he received any sexual gratification from the assault on the seven-year-old girl and said semen with is DNA on it found on her must have transferred innocently from tracksuit bottoms when she was in the boot of the car.
"It was all about sexual gratification by you, wasn't it?" asked Mr Altman.
"No," replied Bishop.
"You are a paedophile aren't you?" asked Mr Altman.
"No," he replied.
"You enjoy controlling children and one aspect of your control of children, particularly girls, is sexual gratification" asked the prosecutor.
"No. Not in any way," replied Bishop, who then said Mr Altman's definition of a paedophile was mistaken.
"A paedophile is someone who believes he is not doing any harm by doing what he's doing, and that's not me," said Bishop.
Mr Altman then asked him why he sexually assaulted the girl in the 1990 incident.
"Due to the psychological trauma of the hate campaign it came out in that behaviour," said Bishop.
"You abducted a seven-year-old girl — two years younger than the girls you were alleged to have killed — bundled her into a car, drove her 14 miles to remote countryside at Devil's Dyke, strangled her and (sexually assaulted) because…" said Mr Altman.
'I Was So Bloody Angry'
"Because I was so bloody angry. At her. At everyone," Bishop interrupted.
"Why didn't you target someone of your own size? A man? An adult?" asked Mr Altman.
"Because there was no-else there when I lost it," replied Bishop.
Bishop was then asked about a series of letters he wrote to a 13-year-old when he was remanded in custody charged with the murders back in 1987.
The defendant insisted he thought the girl was 15 and that he did not plan to have sex with her until after her 16th birthday.
The age of consent in the UK is 16.
There was then a break in proceedings and when the jury finally returned they were told Bishop would not be giving any more evidence.
The trial continues.