Trial of the facts was the most searched online term in Northern Ireland over the last month, the judge presiding over the Donaldson sex abuse trial noted in his closing speech.
“Forget Google,” Judge Paul Ramsey told jurors.
His comments were made at Newry Crown Crown before the jury retired to consider its verdict in the case against Jeffrey Donaldson, and his wife and co-accused, Eleanor Donaldson.
Since the four-week trial started last month, there have even been Freedom of Information requests on the legal process used to prosecute Eleanor Donaldson.
RM Block
She was deemed unfit to stand trial on mental health grounds.
“It is unusual to have a trial of the facts run alongside a conventional trial, but not unheard of,” the judge said last week.
The process is allowed for under Article 49A of the Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 if a court rules a person is not fit to stand trial.
It involves a court hearing to determine whether an accused committed the alleged offences.
Three sets of psychiatric reports were submitted in pretrial hearings for Eleanor Donaldson.
Jurors were asked to determine if she carried out the acts in relation to aiding and abetting her husband’s offending.
On Monday, the former DUP leader was found guilty of all 18 child abuse charges he faced, including rape.
His wife was charged with four counts of aiding and abetting and one count of cruelty to children. The jury found she had carried out the acts.
The offences occurred between 1985 and 2008.
Unlike a criminal trial, a jury cannot find a defendant guilty of any offence – even murder – during a trial of the facts.
If the accused is found to have committed the acts – in this case, aiding and abetting serious sexual offending – they cannot be sent to prison. However, they can be acquitted.
They do not have to be present during proceedings; Eleanor Donaldson did not attend Newry Crown Court.
The burden of proof for prosecutors remains the same in a trial of the facts: it must prove its case so a jury must be sure beyond all reasonable doubt the accused committed the alleged acts.
Despite her absence, Eleanor Donaldson was represented by a defence barrister who cross-examined the two victims in the case and made closing submissions on her behalf.
Audio recordings of her police interviews were played to the court.
When the jury returned its verdict on Eleanor Donaldson, the foreman was asked, “did you find the defendant did the act?”
He replied “yes” to each charge.
One of the most high-profile trials of the facts before the Donaldson trial was that of former IRA leader Ivor Bell, who was charged with soliciting the murder of mother-of-10 Jean McConville.
The 1972 killing was one of the most notorious of the Troubles.
Bell, who died two years ago, had dementia at the time of the 2019 hearing and was acquitted.
Belfast solicitor Peter Corrigan represented the 82-year-old republican and said that because of Bell’s illness, he could not have given proper instruction or evidence. “He was fit to understand the charges but he wasn’t fit to stand trial and effectively participate in the trial,” he said.
The main impact of a trial of the facts lies in the sentencing, as it restricts a judge’s sentencing options.
“You can’t impose a custodial sentence. That’s key really,” said Corrigan.
In relation to Eleanor Donaldson, options available to the judge, instead of a sentence, include her being committed to a secure hospital unit.
She can also be subject to a guardianship order or a supervision and treatment order. These are mainly designed to protect the public in circumstances where it is determined that the accused is a danger to society.
In the case of a supervision order, this would involve probation oversight and monitoring.
If none of these orders is suitable, the defendant is given an absolute discharge. This means that no suitable punishment or order is applicable.
