I'm amazed to see that Jackson and Olding have had their application for costs ( pretty hefty sums) after the Belfast rape trial denied by the female judge whose remarks suggest that she considers the acquitted men guilty and seeks to impose a penalty by this means. I thought it was the case that if you win a trial you get costs and if you lose you pay. Can this decision be appealed ?
''In the Republic the fact of an acquittal is not a deciding factor on whether a person who had been refused legal aid should have their costs paid by the state, but it is not without weight, according to legal sources.
With the bulk of criminal trials, the defendants come from a socio-economic class whereby they qualify for free legal aid. But defendants who would not normally qualify for legal aid might be granted their costs if the charges they had to face were serious. The matter is at the discretion of the judge and the key question is where the interests of justice lie.''
To me this is plain bias on the part of the judge. These guys suffered a loss of earnings , loss of reputation , lost their jobs and had to go abroad to gain similar employment and now must sustain a huge financial burden as well because they were forced to try to clear their name. Whatever they did or didn't do -they are paying a massive disproportionate price. it is incredible to me that they didn't get at least a fraction of their costs. Some legal opinion suggests that appeal would be futile...which is quite a worrying consideration in itself. Every day I pray that I will not fall into the clutches of the law/legal system -where ,sadly, as I have seen over many decades there can be no real expectation of getting justice.
