The DUP thread

[tbrick18]

If he's guilty of what he's alleged to be guilty of then he'd have no shame so wouldn't bat an eyelid about victims. If he's not no reason he shouldn't be in public life.

A completely mad one. Could be staring at a lengthy enough jail term. Who knows what way it will pan out.

Hadn't thought of it like that, but I guess that's right.

Agree with other posters though - innocent until proven otherwise.

[tbrick18]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

[David McKeown]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.

[armaghniac]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.

However, at present this case seems different from teachers, coaches etc where there are multiple people to come forward. But you never know.

[Milltown Row2]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.

However, at present this case seems different from teachers, coaches etc where there are multiple people to come forward. But you never know.

Are there not two people involved in this?

[Applesisapples]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.

However, at present this case seems different from teachers, coaches etc where there are multiple people to come forward. But you never know.

Are there not two people involved in this?

yes

[Milltown Row2]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.

However, at present this case seems different from teachers, coaches etc where there are multiple people to come forward. But you never know.

Are there not two people involved in this?

yes

Then it shouldn't fall down to a he said she said scenario?

Been plenty of legacy cases were people have been found guilty, but I'd worry on how they will throw together a set of jurors for this shambles

[tbrick18]

Only thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.

As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.

Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?

I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.

Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.

So does that mean the PPS could still decide not prosecute?
I've no idea how these things work, I'd made the assumption it only gets this far if the PPS are already in a position to prosecute.
Interesting.

[NAG1]

Fact the police went straight to charge I think should give an indication in this case.

That's not to decide on the outcome before it has been in front of the court, but the police obviously feel there is case here to be presented.

[Pub Bore]

I see one of the charges relates to 1985 and Donaldson was married in 1987.  As for the Lady Eleanor (any Lindisfarne fans out there?), David McKeown will know better than me but I think "aiding and abetting" usually suggests something more active than just knowing and doing nothing about it?

[Wildweasel74]

Seen some tosser making a dick of himself outside the courtroom when Donaldson came out. Some people do anything to post online.

[johnnycool]

Seen some tosser making a dick of himself outside the courtroom when Donaldson came out. Some people do anything to post online.

Allegedly a TUV supporter, but that could be BS.

Although the same moron posts another video where he's approached by Ben Lowry who seems to know him going by the interaction.

[imtommygunn]

Whoever it is there's something seriously wrong with them...