Yesterday's libel judgment has not ended Ian Bailey's legal ordeal in relation to the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier, writes Carol Coulter, Legal Affairs Correspondent
The judgment in his libel action has not brought closure for Ian Bailey, who must be contemplating the possibility of three further airings in court of the allegations against him.
The decision that the bulk of the articles published about him were justified was a victory for the newspapers. But it was not a total victory, as the judge found Mr Bailey had been defamed by two of the papers in one allegation - that he had been violent towards his former wife.
This leaves the issue of costs unresolved, at least for the moment. One thing is certain - Mr Bailey will not emerge better off from this, as he lost the case he took against six of the eight newspapers he sued, and so will have to bear their considerable costs, even though they shared a defence team. That team consisted of two senior and one junior counsel, and a team of solicitors from McCann Fitzgerald. The combined costs will exceed €250,000. The €8,000 in damages won't go far in meeting it.
The two newspapers who were found to have defamed Mr Bailey, the Sun and the Irish Mirror, were yesterday considering an appeal. Such an appeal would be in the High Court, and would entail a fresh hearing of the whole case. They would be at liberty to bring in evidence not brought forward in the Circuit Court case.
The costs of such a case would be very great, and Mr Bailey is not a man of means, so even if those papers won, they would be unlikely to recover their costs. They will, therefore, be considering whether or not it is worth appealing on principle.
But even if they decide on the basis of expediency that they will not appeal, Mr Bailey is facing two other possible court cases.
The first is the civil action for damages from the family of Ms Toscan du Plantier, whose parents and son are suing him for the suffering caused by the unlawful death of their daughter and mother.
No date has been set for the hearing of this case, but it is likely to proceed in the wake of yesterday's judgment. "From our point of view the judgment was very encouraging," said Mr Robert Dorr, solicitor for the family.
"We'll be seeking third-party discovery against the State. We will be hoping to get all the evidence collected in the course of the criminal investigation. The gardaí will be essential witnesses."
Meanwhile, the Director of Public Prosecutions is likely to be poring over the transcript of the libel trial, to see whether any new evidence emerged that would allow him to bring charges in the case. At the request of the family, the case has been reviewed three times by the DPP, who decided not to charge anyone in connection with the murder. However, he has also made it clear that the case is not closed, and that charges could be brought if new evidence came to light.
As well as examining the transcript, it is likely the DPP will be discussing the case with the Cork State Solicitor, as a representative of his office was present during the libel trial. He will have heard witnesses, some of whom gave statements to the gardaí and could be called in a criminal trial.
But bringing a criminal prosecution would be fraught with difficulties, not least because of the libel case itself. Much of the evidence during the libel trial would not be admissible in a criminal trial, notably the evidence that Mr Bailey seriously assaulted his partner on three occasions, and has a conviction for one of those assaults.
His defence lawyers could argue that this evidence, and other material aired during the libel trial, was deeply prejudicial to his client, and that it would be impossible to get a jury that could hear the case with an open mind.
However, this would not be the first time that a criminal case followed huge amounts of publicity concerning the alleged crime, the most recent example being the George Redmond case.
Whatever the next legal moves are, they can only add to Mr Bailey's woes.