NI: Belfast rape trial has cost over £500,000 so far
The nine-week trial of Ireland and Ulster rugby players Paddy Jackson, Stuart Olding, Blane McIlroy and Rory Harrison has cost more than half a million pounds and is likely to rise further, the Belfast Telegraph reports.
Mr Jackson and Mr Olding were found not guilty of rape in March at the end of the high-profile trial.
Mr McIlroy, who was accused of exposure, and Mr Harris, who was accused of perverting the course of justice and withholding information, were also found not guilty.
Figured released under a Freedom of Information (FOI) request reveal that the legal aid bill for the four men currently stands at £336,950.
Judge Patricia Smyth is currently considering an application from Mr Jackson, who privately funded his defence, to recoup his costs from the state.
A total of £159,743 has been spent by the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) on prosecution costs, including £152,743 on counsel and £6,259 on witness expenses.
A total of £53,537 was incurred by the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (NICTS), including £11,616 on staff and judiciary costs, £3,644 on security costs, £16,427 for stenographers, £2,600 in jury costs, £12,540 in jury expenses and £6,650 in courtroom costs.
A spokesperson for the PPS told the Belfast Telegraph: “This case was properly brought before the courts and all fees were assessed and paid in line with the prosecution fee scheme which is structured in agreement between the Public Prosecution Service and the Department of Justice.
“It is worth noting that a number of factors influenced the costs involved in taking this case to trial. These include the gravity of the charges, the fact that there were multiple defendants on trial, and the further fact that the crown court trial ran for almost nine weeks.
“This case was carefully considered by a team of specialist lawyers in our serious crime unit and by experienced senior counsel.
“It was concluded that the test for prosecution was met, meaning that there was both sufficient evidence to provide a reasonable prospect of conviction and that it was in the public interest to prosecute these defendants.
“The PPS remains satisfied that the test for prosecution was met in this case and that, in those circumstances, it was entirely appropriate that the case be heard and ultimately determined by a jury.”