Donaldson case complainants ‘not reliable enough’ for guilty verdicts – defence

Jeffrey Donaldson arriving at Newry Crown Court, where he and his wife Eleanor Donaldson are accused of historical sexual offences. Picture date: Wednesday June 17, 2026. PA Photo. Photo credit should read: Brian Lawless/PA Wire

Two complainants who have accused Jeffrey Donaldson of sexual offences are not “sufficiently reliable enough” for the jury to find him guilty, a barrister has told a court.

The former DUP leader’s barrister Kieran Vaughan also told the jury to “ignore the noise and focus on the evidence” when they consider their verdicts.

Mr Donaldson, 63, has pleaded not guilty to 18 alleged offences.

The charges include one count of rape and allegations of indecent assault and gross indecency, and span a period between 1985 and 2008 involving two alleged victims.

Complainants A and B have both given evidence at the trial.

Both women allege they were abused as children.

Jeffrey Donaldson spent two days in the witness box giving evidence in the trial last week.

Eleanor Donaldson, 60, from Dublinhill Road, Dromore, Co Down, denies several charges of aiding and abetting her husband’s alleged offending.

She is facing a trial of the facts on mental health grounds.

The trial of the facts will test the evidence in the case but cannot result in a criminal conviction.

On Wednesday, Mr Vaughan continued his closing speech, by dealing with allegations made by Complainant A against Mr Donaldson.

He described an incident where A alleged Mr Donaldson had used a light to stare at her genitals as a “misunderstanding”.

He said: “She has proven herself to be a very, very unreliable witness.” 

Mr Vaughan pointed out that Complainant A had stated her memories of the incident were “foggy”.

He said: “She is not sure about the very thing the prosecution invite you to be sure about.” 

The barrister said: “We say the evidence shows that nothing happened.” 

Mr Vaughan said a separate allegation that Mr Donaldson had rubbed A’s breasts lacks “any semblance of credibility”.

He said her evidence about the alleged incident showed she “is a witness who is capable of telling a terrible untruth”.

The barrister said A was a witness who was capable of “leaving things out of her evidence if she thinks it suits her own ends”.

He added that she was also capable of “adding things in if she thinks it suits her own ends”.

Mr Vaughan said: “I end where I began – ignore the noise, focus on the evidence.” 

He said if the jury focused on the evidence “you will see there are significant and fundamental issues” with the credibility of each of the complainants.

He added: “They are not sufficiently reliable enough to drive you to a sure conclusion that he is guilty.” 

Mr 

Vaughan invited the jury to find Mr Donaldson not guilty of all the allegations that he faces.

Ian Turkington KC, who represents Eleanor Donaldson, next delivered his closing speech.

He told the jury that she had been determined unfit to stand trial and said that should not he “held against her”.

He said: “It is vitally important to remember the following, Eleanor Donaldson has not chosen not to be here and clear her name”.

The barrister added: “She never gets the chance in this courtroom to look you in the eye and tell her side of the story.” 

He said the jury had been left “with only one side of the story”.

Mr Turkington said the jury had to ask the question if the case the prosecution had made against Eleanor Donaldson is “clear on the evidence”.

He added: “We say not.” “What we suggest all you really have to go on is the account of the complainants.” 

He said the “fundamental delay” in the two complainants bringing their allegations to police should cause the jury “considerable concern”.

Mr Turkington told the jury to guard against asking why complainants would make allegations if they were not true.

He said “false allegations are peddled” in courts every day.

Mr Turkington said: “The real question is whether you can be sure the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt”.

Mr Turkington said that was “not the case”.

The barrister said Eleanor Donaldson’s interview with detectives after she was arrested in 2024 showed she had “nothing to hide”.

He said: “The defence case is these allegations are simply untrue if not ludicrous.

“They simply don’t stack up.” 

Mr Turkington said: “What you can be sure about is that she categorically denies any offending.” 

Referring to the prosecution case as a “jigsaw”, the barrister added: “How could you ever see a clear picture in relation to this case?

“How could you ever be sure beyond reasonable doubt without many missing pieces of that jigsaw.” The trial continues.