Donaldson sex abuse allegations cannot be 'brushed under the carpet any longer', jury told

The jury in the sex abuse trial of Sir Jeffrey Donaldson has been told that the consequences of what he allegedly did to two women when they were children cannot be "brushed under the carpet any longer" and he should be found guilty.

In her closing speech, prosecution barrister Rosemary Walsh KC said the consequences of the former Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader's actions, and to a lesser extent his wife Lady Eleanor Donaldson's, were why "we are all here today".

Sir Jeffrey has pleaded not guilty to 18 sex abuse charges, including one count of rape, allegedly committed between 1985 and 2008.

Lady Donaldson denies five related charges of aiding and abetting.

She is facing a trial of the facts and is not participating in proceedings.

Later, in the defence's closing remarks, Sir Jeffrey's barrister Kieran Vaughan KC urged the jury to ignore the media "noise" surrounding the case, set aside his politics and consider the evidence "without fear or favour".

He added that, for the jury to convict him, they "must be sure".

"Nothing less will do. Suspicion is not good enough. You have to be sure."

Earlier, the jury at Newry Crown Court heard the prosecution's closing remarks to the case.

Towards the end of her comments, Walsh said the court was not assembled because the two alleged victims, known as Complainant A and Complainant B, had "fabricated their accounts or because they were conjuring up lies to tell".

She added they were there "because the sexual abuse they suffered has consequences – consequences that cannot be ignored and brushed under the carpet any longer".

Walsh said that when the evidence was "pieced together", it showed that Complainant A and Complainant B were "telling the truth about what happened to them".

"And that is why they have given evidence to this court," she added.

"Not because they are promoting a pack of malicious lies for absolutely no good reason. But because this is what happened to them and they made a decision to call it out.

"They put their heads above the parapet and braced for what was coming at them."

In her initial remarks to the jury, Walsh asked the jury to recall the "pain and hurt still so visible" from Complainant A and B.

She described "the long and arduous process" the women had experienced after making their allegations.

"This is no walk in the park. This is not something they are doing for the fun of it or the sake of it," she said.

Walsh told the jury it was human nature to "box" or "shelve" feelings away – and that was what Complainant A and B had done over the years.

However, she said there had been "turning points" in both women's lives that prompted them to finally report their allegations to the police in March 2024.

"Today you see two women at a time when they are ready for this, but they've not always been that way," Walsh said.

The barrister told the jury that Complainant A knew "this would not be a normal case" because of who Sir Jeffrey was.

"She had to grapple with all the connotations that came with that," Walsh said.

"It was a huge, huge decision to make and not one she made lightly."

Walsh described how Complainant B had blamed herself for Complainant A's alleged abuse because she had not made her allegations sooner.

She said despite Complainant B having previously told a number of people - including a Christian pastor, the founders of a Christian centre, and a friend - that she had been abused as a child, she did not set out "the gory details" because "no one asked her".

"The topic remained untouched, the hornets' nest avoided," she said.

Later in her closing speech, Walsh referred to a meeting that took place in the Christian Family Centre in Armoy, County Antrim, in the 1990s.

The meeting was attended by Complainant B, Sir Jeffrey and the founders of the centre, Davey and Linda Hoy. It had been arranged after the complainant told a pastor about the alleged abuse.

The trial previously heard that Sir Jeffrey had apologised to the complainant during the meeting.

However, he said the apology was not for any alleged offences. He said no allegations had been raised, and that he had said sorry for if he had ever made Complainant B feel "uncomfortable".

In her closing speech, Walsh told the jury that the meeting was "significant" for a number of reasons.

She said it supported Complainant B's account of what is alleged to have happened to her, and that it showed Sir Jeffrey's was "willing to lie and shift his account".

Walsh also referred to a letter written by Sir Jeffrey to Complainant A, the younger of the two alleged victims, in which he referred to being in "a deep pit of sin".

It also referenced his "sinful nature" and the "deep wounds" that he had caused.

The trial previously heard from Sir Jeffrey that the letter had nothing to do with Complainant A's allegations.

But Walsh, in her closing speech, said the reference to causing Complainant A "deep wounds" was "highly significant".

Kieran Vaughan KC, acting for the former DUP leader, then began the defence's closing remarks, telling the jury they had been "bombarded" by outside noise from social media, newspapers, TV and podcasts.

"That noise will not help you reach a true verdict," he said.

"Put that noise out of the equation. Consider the evidence without fear or favour."

He also asked the jury to "leave behind" what they know about Sir Jeffrey and his politics and reminded them that Lady Eleanor Donaldson's police interview evidence is inadmissible against her husband.

Referring to the two alleged victims, Vaughan claimed there are "significant warning signs" about them, and the case came down to their word against the defendant's.

He noted the alleged offences occurred between 21 and 39 years ago and that the charges "are not specified in terms of day, a week, a month, or even a year".

Vaughan pointed out there was no medical or forensic evidence, or witnesses from the time.

He urged the jury to scrutinise what the two complainants said with "extra care".

In his evidence Sir Jeffrey said he believed they were lying and Vaughan noted that he was asked why he thought they had made up the allegations.

"In the cold light of day, it's almost an impossible question for him to answer," the lawyer said.

"The inference behind the question is these complainants must be telling truth by virtue of simple fact they are here.

"We say be careful about jumping to a conclusion based on simple proposition they wouldn't be here unless they are telling the truth."

He said it was "beyond odd" that after many years had passed, both women came forward on the same day in 2024 to make "similar complaints against the same person".

Vaughan reminded the jury the burden of proof is on the prosecution and that "Mr Donaldson has to prove nothing".

He went on to deal with the allegations made by Complainant B – the older of the two alleged victims.

He said the rape allegation "almost defies belief".

He went on to say there was no forensic evidence, no medical evidence, "no complaint from anyone" at the time and "no witnesses the next day to say she [Complainant B] was acting oddly".

"It is, we say, her word against his word," he added.

He then turned to a separate allegation by Complainant B that Sir Jeffrey had lifted up her top and touched her chest and that Lady Donaldson had witnessed this incident but walked away.

Like the rape allegation, Vaughan said this "almost defies belief".

Sir Jeffrey's barrister argued there were a number of what he called "points of concern" with Complainant B's evidence, which the defence argued "show she is unreliable as a witness".

He argued that when Complainant B had told a friend and a Christian pastor that she had been abused it was about "trying to arouse sympathy" and "deflection" from other issues in her life.

Later, Vaughan asked the jury why Sir Jeffrey would have attended the meeting with the Hoys and Complainant B if he had abused her.

"If he has done what they have said he has done he would be insane to go up there to put himself in that position, in front of two independent people who could come here years later and say he was accused of rape and sexual abuse and he admitted it," he said.

"But that did not happen."

Vaughan will finish his closing speech on Wednesday morning and is expected to be followed by Lady Donaldson's barrister Ian Turkington KC.

Sir Jeffrey denies acts of gross indecency and indecent assault against Complainant A when she was a child, between 1999 and 2008.

He also denies other alleged offences dating back to 1985, including a charge of rape, against Complainant B.

Lady Donaldson is facing a trial of the facts after she was previously deemed unfit to face a conventional trial on mental health grounds, and is therefore not participating in proceedings.