Donaldson faces cross-examination over meeting with complainant arranged through Christian group

JEFFREY DONALDSON HAS denied that he attended a meeting in the 1990s with an alleged victim to nip her claims of sexual abuse against him “in the bud”.

Prosecution barrister Rosemary Walsh KC is continuing to cross-examine the former DUP leader at his historical sexual offences trial at Newry Crown Court.

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 time period between 1985 and 2008 involving two alleged victims.

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

Both women allege they were abused as children.

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 after Judge Paul Ramsey ruled her unfit to stand trial on mental health grounds.

The trial of the facts will test the evidence in the case, but cannot result in a criminal conviction. Eleanor Donaldson will not appear in court during the trial. 

Resuming her cross-examination this morning, Rosemary Walsh KC referred to a phone call Donaldson received in the 1990s from David Hoy, the founder of the Christian Family Centre in Armoy.

The court has previously heard that Complainant B stayed at the centre in the 1990s after developing an issue with drugs.

The court has also been told that Complainant B had told a church pastor at the centre about the alleged abuse, after which he introduced her to Hoy and his wife and a meeting with Donaldson was arranged.

The court has also heard B claim that Donaldson apologised to her at that meeting.

The barrister asked Donaldson if he did not see “anything strange” about the approach from Hoy.

Donaldson said: “I get lots of phone calls from people I have never met before in the course of my political work.”

Walsh suggested that he filtered his phone calls.

He said: “I don’t actually. I have given my phone number out to many people over the years.”

He said it was “not unusual” for him to get a phone call from someone he had never met before.

Walsh suggested Donaldson needed to meet Hoy because “he was going to be talking to you about a sensitive matter”.

Donaldson said: “That is absolutely not true.”

He said he had not tried to “avoid the meeting”, and was happy to meet Hoy.

Advertisement

Walsh said: “You had to go on the defensive to deal with this?”

Donaldson said: “That is not true.”

Walsh pointed out that Hoy’s evidence to the court was that an “allegation” had been made.

Donaldson said: “The word allegation was never mentioned to me. If it had been mentioned, I would have immediately asked what it was about.”

Walsh said: “You knew fine rightly what it was about.”

Donaldson responded: “That is not true.”

Walsh asked if Hoy had “made up” the evidence that an allegation had been made.

He said: “I am saying he is mistaken in his recollection.”

Walsh said Donaldson had attended the meeting in Amoy as he “knew this was something you needed to nip in the bud”.

He said: “That is not true at all.”

Walsh pointed out that before the meeting Complainant B had first raised the allegations against Donaldson with someone else.

He said: “I had no knowledge whatsoever of any of that.”

Walsh asked the former Lagan Valley MP if the meeting had involved him apologising.

Donaldson said he had said he was “sorry if she felt uncomfortable”.

The barrister asked: “What were you apologising for?”

He said: “That she felt uncomfortable.”

Walsh suggested he was “trying to find a reason why you apologised to her”.

He said: “Not at all.”

He added: “I went to Armoy in good faith and I have faithfully relayed to you what the meeting was about.”

Walsh suggested Donaldson had “taken control” of the meeting.

He said: “No, not at all.”

She said: “You went in there and said you knew what all this was about and you were truly sorry.”

He said: “That is absolutely to misrepresent what happened at that meeting, that is not the case at all.”

Related Reads

Eleanor Donaldson hit 'blank wall' asking husband about alleged incident with complainant

Jeffrey Donaldson told police he ‘can’t get head round’ allegations of sexual abuse

Donaldson trial: Complainant told pastor she could not report alleged abuse as it would 'destroy reputation'

Walsh suggested Donaldson did not want Complainant B “going through allegations”.

He said: “That is absolutely not true.”

She said: “You shut her down?”

Donaldson said: “I absolutely did not shut her down.”

The barrister referred to evidence from Hoy, where he said B was asked did she want to “take it further”.

Walsh suggested this referred to the police being called.

Donaldson said: “I do not recall that being said.”

Complainant A

Walsh then moved on to allegations against Donaldson made by Complainant A.

She asked if sexual abuse of A had started when she was of primary school age.

Donaldson said: “That is absolutely not the case.”

The barrister asked if alleged abuse began with “touching outside of clothing”.

He said: “No, no, no.”

She put it to him that he had put his tongue in A’s mouth on a number of occasions.

He said: “No.”

Walsh said: “When she did recoil, you laughed it off?”

He said: “No.”

The barrister asked: “She is lying about that?”

He said: “Yes.”

The trial continues.