Sex assault case man is named

The move follows legal submissions from the media, defence and prosecution at Downpatrick Magistrates’ Court,

“My view is that if there is fair and accurate reporting of the defendant’s name...there would not be any substantial risk to the administration of justice,” said the judge.

He added: “I do not see how the publication of his name could possibly prejudice” the future of the case.

Mr Logue, from Lady Wallace Crescent in Lisburn was not at court to hear the arguments or the judge’s ruling.

He is charged with committing sexual assault on 23 November last year, “the circumstances being that the touching was sexual, that she did not consent to the touching and you did not reasonably believe that she so consented”.

A temporary reporting restriction was put in place at the end of August but that order was lifted on Tuesday.

Defence QC Eugene Grant had earlier argued that to name Mr Logue would prejudice the administration of justice in circumstances where “there’s not a scintilla of evidence” to substantiate the allegations and in circumstances where he would be applying, at a later date, to have the case dismissed.

He further submitted that to name the local solicitor, given the nature of the charge, would result in the loss of his personal and professional reputation.

On behalf of the media however, Frances Lynch counter-argued that Mr Grant had not produced any evidence to support his claims which he was required to do and that there were “examples across the board” of professionals being charged with crimes, “ranging from judges right through to solicitors”.

She said the barring order sought under the Contempt of Court Act “is not a vehicle for the comfort or welfare of a defendant” and that indeed, if the case was reported and Mr Logue ultimately acquitted, his reputation would be “vindicated” as a result of the reporting of the case.

The barrister also submitted that as the case would be dealt with by a judge sitting alone in the Magistrates’ Court, there would be no potential prejudice to any jury trying the case.

Ms Lynch’s arguments were echoed by a prosecution lawyer who told the court that “on a daily basis we see people brought to the courts from every profession, teachers, doctors, social workers and members of the legal profession and they’re not afforded the benefit of not being put before the public”.

She revealed that despite Mr Grant’s claims over a lack of evidence, the alleged incident had been captured on CCTV and that many witness statements had already been taken.

Concluding his ruling and listing the case for trial on 2 December, District Judge Broderick told the court: “I do not see any reason that I should exercise my discretion or statutory power under section 4.2 and for those reasons I’m obliged to refuse Mr Grant’s application.”