The DUP thread

[David McKeown]

Obviously people are not agreeing, it might be that one or two that are digging their heals in or possibly working out which one to give guilty to

I understand we've had the majority direction so it's more than one or two. Admittedly it must be between 3 and 10 who think either way

[David McKeown]

What was Donaldson's side of the story in what he was supposedly apologising for in both the letter of apology or the apology at the Armoy meeting?

That was reported but I think probably unlawfully so it's not possible to answer that anymore.

[Main Street]

What was Donaldson's side of the story in what he was supposedly apologising for in both the letter of apology or the apology at the Armoy meeting?

That was reported but I think probably unlawfully so it's not possible to answer that anymore.

Is Donaldson's side of that story part of the court recorded evidence

[David McKeown]

What was Donaldson's side of the story in what he was supposedly apologising for in both the letter of apology or the apology at the Armoy meeting?

That was reported but I think probably unlawfully so it's not possible to answer that anymore.

Is Donaldson's side of that story part of the court recorded evidence

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by court recorded evidence. There's been an awful lot of evidence heard by the Jury that can't be reported for legal reasons.

[Dougal Maguire]

What was Donaldson's side of the story in what he was supposedly apologising for in both the letter of apology or the apology at the Armoy meeting?

That was reported but I think probably unlawfully so it's not possible to answer that anymore.

Is Donaldson's side of that story part of the court recorded evidence

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by court recorded evidence. There's been an awful lot of evidence heard by the Jury that can't be reported for legal reasons.

Can it be reported when the case is over?

[David McKeown]

What was Donaldson's side of the story in what he was supposedly apologising for in both the letter of apology or the apology at the Armoy meeting?

That was reported but I think probably unlawfully so it's not possible to answer that anymore.

Is Donaldson's side of that story part of the court recorded evidence

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by court recorded evidence. There's been an awful lot of evidence heard by the Jury that can't be reported for legal reasons.

Can it be reported when the case is over?

I thought what was reported was illegal. Hence why I'm not repeating here and I noticed it was removed a few hours later.

[Armagh4sam2024]

We should change the name of this thread to DUPaedos

[Armamike]

Why would a direct descendent and another close relation make the accusations if they were not real?

They destroyed familial relationships in bringing the case.
They aren't going to gain monetary.
Indeed, they are more likely to lose out financially (inheritance).


I though the (at least what was reported) defence barrister's arguments yesterday were disgusting and the judge really should have pulled him on it.

Small wonder that so few rape crimes come to court if the defence are allowed to carry themselves like that.

Thought the defending barrister comments been horrible whole way through, basically said the victims were lying every time he questioned them

I would have thought a high ranking barrister would be able to come up with a better line of argument than - eh, you're a liar.

[RedHand88]

I've always wondered how a defence solicitor/barrister can seperate their own opinion from the trial itself.
Even if they believe the defendant is guilty they still need to do everything they can to get a not guilty verdict, which I couldn't do.

[playwiththewind1st]

I've always wondered how a defence solicitor/barrister can seperate their own opinion from the trial itself.
Even if they believe the defendant is guilty they still need to do everything they can to get a not guilty verdict, which I couldn't do.

Sure, isn't shedloads of money [legal aid] a wonderful thing?

[DaleCooper]

Roy Keane knows

[gallsman]

I would have thought a high ranking barrister would be able to come up with a better line of argument than - eh, you're a liar.

The burden of proof lies with the prosecution. It's not up to the defence team to explain why the alleged victims claim what they claim.

[LC]

I've always wondered how a defence solicitor/barrister can seperate their own opinion from the trial itself.
Even if they believe the defendant is guilty they still need to do everything they can to get a not guilty verdict, which I couldn't do.

Sure, isn't shedloads of money [legal aid] a wonderful thing?

Biggest gravy train about.

If the plug was pulled in this in the morning quite a few of the high profile legal practices in this country would take some hit.

[RadioGAAGAA]

Thought the defending barrister comments been horrible whole way through, basically said the victims were lying every time he questioned them

Would be interesting to see how it would go with a defamation case if Donaldson is proven guilty.

It'd certainly clip the wings of fukkers like Kieran Vaughan.

Well that would need a law change so I wouldn't have thought that's likely at all.

Didn't realise you could say whatever the f you wanted in court and get away with it.

Thought it was reserved for parliament where you can do anything but (quite ironically given this case) call someone a lair.

[RadioGAAGAA]

Sue a barrister? Be nice to live in that world but the most would be discplinary matter. Under the adversial system its viewed as "fair play".

The Lucy Letby case was particularly awful in this regard.

Well, if the legal system ever wonder why such a low proportion of rape and sexual abuses cases come to court - the courts need to take a good look in the mirror.

Ahh that old nonsense.

No surprise at not taking criticism of the legal system well.


Its hardly an opinion limited to me as well, see here

Attending court can be hugely intimidating for victims of crime. Many will find the experience highly-retraumatising. For rape victims, this is particularly the case.

Special measures are ways to help victims to give their best possible evidence in court. An exceptionally effective one is known as 'Section 28' after the clause in the statute which introduced it.

S28 says that a complainant may have their evidence videoed by the police (instead of making a written statement) which is then served on the defence. The defence then have time to prepare and when they are ready will cross-examine the complainant which is also video recorded. These two videos then become the complainant's evidence for the trial, to be played whenever it takes place.

A huge advantage is that once the recordings are done, the complainant has finished with the proceedings. They can get on with their life and take therapy if they need to. This gets them out of the court queue, saving them perhaps years of anxious waiting. Completing their evidence close to the time of offence also aids memory recall and helps to reduce the distress experienced by some witnesses when giving evidence to a full courtroom at trial.

S28 was piloted long ago and was rolled out nationally for vulnerable complainants from the start of the pandemic. I worked with the Criminal Bar to press for this rollout and the Government response was excellent. However, that limits the use of S28 mainly to child victims. It is good news that the Deputy Prime Minister has resolved to roll it out also for 'intimidated' witnesses which includes adult rape complainants. After its announcement in December, it has since been rolled out to a total of 26 out of approximately 85 Crown Courts in England and Wales. This is excellent and this work must be sped up even further. There are clear views amongst some criminal justice professionals that this should be the default way in which all sexual assault complainants give their evidence. The courts have been using video evidence for almost two decades and S28 is too beneficial for victims not to be used throughout the court system in England and Wales.