Jeffrey Donaldson: Judge wants all sides to work towards November trial date
A judge has said he wants all sides to work towards ensuring the trial of former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson and his wife Eleanor Donaldson, on charges relating to alleged historical sex offences, goes ahead in November.
A previous court hearing had been told that there had been a deterioration in the medical condition of Eleanor Donaldson.
Advertisement
A brief review of the case at Newry Crown Court on Thursday heard that an assessment over whether she is currently fit to stand trial will take place next month.
The trial had previously been due to start in March, but was delayed because of Eleanor Donaldson's ill health.
A new trial date has been set for November 3rd.
Eleanor Donaldson at an earlier court hearing. Photo: Liam McBurney/PA
Jeffrey Donaldson (62), who did not attend the hearing on Thursday, has pleaded not guilty to 18 alleged offences.
Advertisement
The charges include one count of rape as well as allegations of indecent assault and gross indecency.
The charges span a time period between 1985 and 2008, and there are two alleged victims.
Eleanor Donaldson (59), of Dublinhill Road, Dromore, who also did not attend court, is facing charges of aiding and abetting, which she denies.
Prosecuting barrister Fiona O'Kane told the court that the hearing had been organised to ensure 'all matters are still on track'.
Advertisement
Eleanor Donaldson's barrister, Ciara Ennis, said there was a 'firm date' for her client to see a forensic psychiatrist on July 18th.
She said: 'There is absolutely no reason I can see at this point that it won't go ahead as planned.'
Judge Paul Ramsey said that the case had already been listed for review again on August 1st in Belfast.
He said: 'By that stage you should have the report, or at least a summary of the findings of the report.
Advertisement
'The prosecution will then decide what they want to do.'
Ms O'Kane said the prosecution had been 'proactive' and had instructed their own psychiatrist, pending the results of the report from the forensic psychiatrist.
Judge Ramsey said: 'The other thing we have to keep in mind, that we are moving towards the anticipated date of the trial, which I am anxious to maintain and keep.'
Ms O'Kane said: 'There is a triumvirate of interests going on here, obviously the complainants are very keen that this matter is progressed, we have the public at large who have an interest in the case, and then there are the defendants themselves.'
Advertisement
Judge Ramsey said: 'I think everybody should work towards that date in any event. Hopefully we will see what matters progress.'
Jeffrey Donaldson, the long-standing MP for Lagan Valley, was arrested and charged at the end of March last year.
Ireland
Jeffrey Donaldson sex abuse case delayed as wife '...
Read More
He resigned as DUP leader and was suspended from the party after the allegations emerged.
Weeks before his arrest, he had led the DUP back into Stormont after a two-year boycott of the powersharing institutions.
Previous deputy leader Gavin Robinson was appointed his successor as DUP chief.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Nato was a victory for Starmer on the global stage, but now he's at war with his own MPs
Sir Keir Starmer seemed chipper as he boarded the plane home from the Nato summit on Wednesday evening. He cheerily thanked hacks in the travelling press delegation for what he said had been a great two-day trip to The Hague. And looking at Nato alone, it had been a success. Across the board, allies signed up to a historic increase in defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. After briefly wavering on his commitment to Article 5, even Donald Trump fell in line. And following a public love-in with Nato secretary general Mark Rutte – who unnervingly, dubbed him the 'daddy' between the two warring nations of Iran and Israel – the US president conceded that the alliance was no longer a 'rip off', saying he is with is his European friends 'all the way'. Meanwhile, Starmer was able to pitch Britain as a leader on the world stage by cosying up to Mr Trump and purchasing 12 new F-35A fighter jets, massively ramping up Britain's nuclear capabilities. But what was left unsaid when the PM briefly greeted the media sharing the plane with him was that he was flying back into the most significant rebellion of his premiership – a revolt which threatens to shake the foundations of the historic majority he won just 11 months ago. Speaking at a press conference about Britain's contribution to defence spending at the Nato summit just hours earlier, the prime minister was forced to deny suggestions that he might be forced out of office before the next election. 'Many people predicted before the election that we 'couldn't read the room' we 'hadn't got the politics right' we 'wouldn't win an election after 2019' because we lost so badly. "We got a landslide victory. So I'm comfortable with reading the room and delivering the change the country needs', Sir Keir insisted. But at home, his MPs are much less convinced. More than 120 Labour MPs have signed an amendment which would kill off the government's flagship £5bn welfare reforms entirely. And there is a growing feeling that the prime minister has failed to listen to them, after he used part of his Nato presser to dismiss the rebellion as 'noises off'. 'No 10 sees MPs as irritants and fodder', one Labour MP with her name on the amendment said. 'We're all working hard and this is how they treat us. It goes back to the point about how arrogant and out of touch they are.' The prime minister's comments at the Nato press conference displayed a real lack of empathy for his own MPs, and ironically, a distinct failure to read the room. It would be hard to argue the prime minister is a wholly unempathetic person. An in-depth profile of the prime minister in the New Statesman published earlier this month showed how deeply he feels the weight of sacrifices made by individuals putting their lives on the line to serve their country. But in his first year in office, it has become increasingly clear that the prime minister is much more comfortable navigating foreign diplomacy than he is with dealing with angry backbenchers. It is in this area that Sir Keir seems entirely unable to empathise. He is known for being pragmatic rather than ideological, and appears to be bored by political manoeuvring. At times, this can provide a refreshing break from the Westminster bubble. But, taken too far, it can be the opposite. Starmer seems to have lost sight of the fact that in some scenarios, political manoeuvring is more than just self-serving posturing. Sometimes, it's a fight for hundreds of thousands of disabled people who are scared of losing vital financial support. The prime minister is now frantically meeting with leading MPs involved in the amendment to try to secure their backing by offering concessions. But the fact that it was allowed to get this far in the first place has angered those who would naturally be inclined to back the prime minister. Many are now threatening to dig their heels in until the bill is dead in the water. As Starmer returns from what was a strong showing at Nato, he must now display some of the empathy and political nous that he so effectively shows on the global stage. If he is unable to do so, he may well lose the domestic battle – and it could be catastrophic for his authority.
Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trans books for toddlers are an outrage
But let's move away from the brazen attempts to brainwash little children for just a moment and settle down in the story corner for today's educational tale (with apologies to Eric Carle), The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner. One day a tiny and very publicity-hungry campaigner, who wanted to be a big deal, hatched a plan to recruit pre-school allies. He had guessed, quite rightly, that toddlers were the only demographic likely to believe his guff that anyone can change sex if they just pop on a frock and get furious about pronouns. On the first day, The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner gobbled up one publishing deal. On the second day he wrote two books explaining that girls who play with trains are probably boys and boys who like pink should be taken to a doctor and diagnosed as transgender. On the third day, The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner bullied women writers who did not agree with his crackpot notions. On the fourth day he slapped a great big Stonewall Award sticker on a book about a sister becoming a brother. On the fifth day, he ate a wheelbarrow of oranges and threatened to cancel anyone who said they were not the only fruit. Then on the sixth day, he disseminated a library of kids' books in which gender transitioning turned out to be the twinkly secret of a happy-ever-after. On the seventh day, he devoured every last scrap of bonkers gender ideology he could find and disappeared off to digest it. Some time later, The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner emerged looking like an extra from RuPaul's Drag Race and announced he was now a biological woman. The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner banged on about his lived experience (of about a week). It was tempting to get very cross indeed. But then the Supreme Court decided that references to 'sex', 'man' and 'woman' in the Equality Act referred to biological sex and after that, nobody cared what he said, safe in the knowledge it was now illegal for him to manspread in the ladies' changing room or beat women to a pulp in the Olympics. The End. If only it were. I thought we were done with all this nonsense – Martine Croxall we salute your eye roll at the witless term 'pregnant people' – and I for one have no desire to give Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigners any more of the attention they so desperately crave. Fighting dirty But new research into the publishing industry carried out by UK pressure group Sex Matters and its US equivalent, SEEN in Publishing, has revealed that a 'shiny, sparkly world of trans identities' is being promoted to young readers, with 'many aimed at toddlers'. Now that really is fighting so dirty I have to speak up: how dare publishers literally mess with little children's minds in this way? Here in north London having two mums is commonplace, two dads is no biggie; small kids aren't that interested in their parents' sexual preferences, they are interested in being loved, nurtured and protected. Growing up is hard enough work, which is why it's utterly immoral to draw toddlers, who haven't even mastered the potty, into the adult world of human identity politics. What next? Assisted dying and late-stage abortion? At this age, most of our collective offspring still believe Paw Patrol is real and the moon follows them home, for pity's sake. Sowing the seeds of doubt about their biological sex is outrageous, indefensible and, let's be honest, exceedingly creepy. Let our littlest citizens learn tolerance, fairness (yes even to women) kindness (ditto) and consideration. But they also deserve to know they have the right to ask questions and press for answers – anathema to the militant trans lobby who prefer to shut everyone down in case they bring up uncomfortable truths like biology. This new audit of the publishing industry found that of 21 publishers surveyed, a fifth of their output on transgender-related products was targeted at children, leading the report to raise concerns that the message in the early-reader books was often that becoming transgender will 'resolve bodily hatred and create enduring joy in the form of 'trans euphoria''. Crikey, if that were the case we'd all be at it. But it's not. Take a look at the shouty trans forums online and I've got to say that enduring joy doesn't feature nearly as often as spittle-flecked misogyny.
The Sun
32 minutes ago
- The Sun
Millionaire toy maker's son fighting to block half-brother from dad's £14.5m fortune after mum's secret affair revealed
A MILLIONAIRE toy maker's son is fighting to boot his illegitimate half-brother out of his dad's £14.5m family fortune after their mum's secret affair was revealed. Stuart Marcus built a lucrative games empire after he began selling dolls' houses from a room above a small East London toy shop in the 1960s. 3 Shortly before he died, he put £14.5m worth of company shares into trust for his "children," with brothers Edward, 47, and Jonathan, 43, both benefiting. But the family was thrown into turmoil after the revelation that Edward was not Stuart's son, but instead the product of an affair between his mum, Patricia Marcus, and lawyer Sydney Glossop. Last year, a judge ruled that Stuart was not Edward's dad, but said that Edward could still benefit from the £14.5m fortune on the basis that both brothers were intended to share. This week, the case came back to court, with lawyers for Jonathan arguing that it was wrong to let solicitor Edward share the wealth when he was not Stuart's biological son. Barrister Thomas Braithwaite, for Jonathan, insisted that the word "children" in the trust document meant "biological children" and so could not include Edward. Stuart Marcus - dubbed "a modest man with a big dream and a big heart" by business colleagues - founded Kitfix Hobbies in 1962 and carved out a major niche in toys, board games and craft kits, later transferring the company HQ to Swaffham, in Norfolk. The disputed trust he set up holds shares valued at £14.5m in the family companies, in which both brothers worked as the brand grew and diversified into other fields such as property, with Jonathan heading up successful commercial operations in Germany. But since 2016, relations between the two brothers soured, climaxing in the High Court clash, in which Jonathan claimed Edward should be excluded from benefiting under the trust. Jonathan claimed Edward was the product of a one-night stand his mum Patricia Marcus, 82, had with a lawyer named Sydney Glossop while his dad was away on business. That claim was based on Jonathan's discovery in 2023 of the "monumental" news that Patricia had confided in Edward that he wasn't Stuart's son during a confidential chat 14 years ago. Although Edward kept his secret for more than a decade, when Jonathan learned the news it triggered a court fight as he tried to have Edward removed as a beneficiary of the multimillion-pound family trust established before Stuart's death, aged 86, in 2020. Jonathan commissioned DNA evidence to back his claim, while his mum told the court herself that she had no doubt that Edward's real dad was Sydney, with whom she had a brief encounter over 40 years ago. From the witness box, Edward told how his mum suddenly spilled the revelation about her affair and his paternity during a meeting at his home in 2010. He said he then searched online for anything about his mystery dad, finally tracking him down to a retirement home near Birmingham, which he and his mum visited in order to meet Sydney. Once there, he witnessed the pair of them "cuddling," said Edward, telling the court: "I saw her sit on the bed and cuddle him and I was shocked to see her behaving that way because it wasn't the way I saw her behave with my father." However, he said he began to harbour doubts about his mum's news and claimed she went back on her account in 2010 when she told him she was wrong about Sydney being his dad. After three days in court last year judge Master Matthew Marsh, found that the evidence confirmed that Edward is not Stuart's son. But found the family trust does not exclude Edward, as in the context of the trust settlement, the word "children" meant both boys. This week, representing Jonathan in an appeal at the High Court, Mr Braithwaite argued that Master Marsh had got it wrong and that Edward should not benefit. Stuart's trust described the beneficiaries as his "children," which Mr Braithwaite insisted could only be taken in its ordinary meaning, "biological children." But for Edward, barrister Matthew Mills argued that it was obvious that Stuart had intended to benefit Edward and urged the judge to dismiss Jonathan's appeal. "Jonathan is doing this to try to take away from Edward any rights in this multi-million pound family business," he told the High Court judge. "Stuart intended to benefit Edward, who he designated and thought to be his child. Realistically, the reasonable person would think that Edward is a beneficiary of this settlement." Following a half-day in court, Sir Anthony reserved his judgment on Jonathan's bid to exclude his brother from the family fortune until a later date. 3
