Lord Janner

I agree very uncomfortable radio 4 interview this morning. x

Having lived in Leicester and Leicestershire for most of my life since I was 21, I vaguely remember rumours about Greville Janner surfacing, probably 40 years ago, so was not surprised to read about this now. I think it's a disgrace that these people are not brought to trial regardless of age and/or infirmity - they had no regard for the vulnerability of their victims. I get the 'not in the public interest' argument but it must surely be in the public interest for it to be shown that nothing stops a prosecution for such a dreadful crime.

Yes indeed. The "rumours" about Lord Janner and Leon Brittain have been well knows for generations. Greville Janner may be old and frail but it would appear that ample evidence exists to arrest, charge and try him. Old age and frailty hasn't stopped many others being tried for similar offences. It is difficult not to feel cynical and fear some kind of conspiracy. I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories but …….

I have not heard this news. If they were alleged to be part of the paedophile ring why are they not being fully investigated?

The whole business just makes me feel very sick indeed.

Mishap - I'm watching the Victoria Derbyshire show which is about to cover the news about Lord Janner.
(don't usually watch morning tv, but am proper poorly and on antibiotics!)

Evidently it's being reported that prosecution won't go ahead because the CPS conclude it wouldn't be in the public interest.

That is exactly the phrase used by the DPP when it decided that prosecuting Cyril Smith in the late 60's early 70's wouldn't be in the public interest.

The salient point for me is why did Jimmy Saville get done and not these politicians. This paedo ring goes right to the top of the Estabishment, who wield tremendous Mafia-like power in the Country. I think someone from outside should lead an enquiry

Has anyone said why it is not in the public interest. On the news, this morning, they said Lord Janner had dementia and was old. I don't think this has been a reason to stop war trials in the past.
Why should this be different? x

J52 - the reason being given is as you say, that he has dementia and no longer poses a threat to children. I'm very uncomfortable about this, as the allegations are serious and go back many years.

jo1book - Jimmy Saville didn't 'get done'. Someone from outside is leading an enquiry - it's an over arching enquiry being led by a Judge from New Zealand.

I am so sick of hearing these things and it brings out the caveman in me - I just want to chop their balls off! I know that having these leanings is not presumably a lifestyle choice and I should have some sympathy; but it is the abuse of power that goes with it that is so sickening. And the lack of concern for these child victims. It is beyond belief.

But what about the children? Surely the public interest should be in the interest of the many abused children. They may not pose a current threat but think (and think graphically) what they actually did to children and got away with. These children were buggered and given a bar of chocolate. Now that should make you sick.

Roger Bannister, Assistant Chief Constable has issued a statement. He says the decision by the CPS is "the wrong one". His statement goes on to suggest the Police are certain he should be prosecuted, has committed very serious offences, often against children in care, over a 30 year period.

jo1book I fully agree with you. The children will now be adults but for many of them the actions of this 'man' will have ruined their lives. It is a disgrace that a case is not going to be taken.

jo1book

I am glad somebody has started this thread because I have mentioned Janner a few times before on GN.

I would like to just point one thing out. If I am not mistaken Leon Brittan is not the same as Janner. Before his death he had only been mentioned without proof or a police investigation in connection to a paedophile ring. Unlike Labour Lord Janner.

Now for Janner.

This is a b----y disgrace.

For those who live in the Leicester area probably remember the Frank Beck/Janner police investigations into peadophilia.

Frank Beck was a peadophile . He was employed by the Leicestershire County Council in the 70/80's, he was in charge of the councils children homes. He was convicted of child sex abuse between 1973. - 1986. At the same time Janner was a Labour MP being investigated by Leicestershire Police. My husband was a police officer and remembers the case well, most of us do.

Former Det. Sgt. Mick Creedon has gone on record to say he 'was told' not to arrest him at that time if my memory serves me well.

I understand Janner is reported to have dementia but to be honest I could spit when the Crown Prosecution uses the term 'Not in the Public Interest'.

Not in the Public Interest! It's of Interest to those who deserve to have their case heard, this is nothing knew, it is a case that had traction years ago.

Those poor kids suffered then and suffer now in their adulthood, Janner on the other hand led a very good life in a powerful job and was deemed of good character to become a Lord. What a diversity of fortune for those who were abused!.

There must be enough evidence to take to court for a long awaited trial, even if he is not capable of attending court himself. Jimmy Saville wasn't in court was he!

If I sound cross then that is exactly how I feel.

Thank you for that post pogs. I know that it is difficult at present because parliament is not sitting and none of us can be sure who our next MP will be but I really feel that it would be useful to let them know our feelings on this issue.

But then JS didn't have the protection of the Establishment. And believe me, It is one thing to have a miner's crimes examined rather than those of a politician who could bring down this country's "Great and Good" by snitching. This House of Cards should fall.

joIbook

I'm not so sure this is an 'Establishment' decision to be honest, who the heck knows?

Why? Because I think the public are 'now' , pity they weren't decades ago, so on top of these stories, allegations, past failings that the Establishment have little room to display the contempt for the public without a backlash. Having said that perhaps their skin has hardn't so much they are prepared to ignore public opinion.

If a man is to clear his name surely a trial needs to go ahead. If not his name will be forever sullied and that is not a fair position to be in, or am I mistaken?

Unless Lord Janner is living on a locked ward, or is so physically disabled that he cannot use his limbs unaided, there is nothing to reassure the public that he is now low risk of harming children. Dementia does not bring immunity, from either further sexually aggressive behaviour or accountability for offences committed. I understand he hasn't been interviewed this time, so has he been assessed by a psychiatrist or psychologist who is qualified to determine whether he is fit to stand trial? Probably not, as this only hapoens when charges have been made and he hasn't been charged. Justice needs to be seen to be done.

Simon Danczuk the Rochdale MP has posted on his fb page that he will ask the DPP for a redacted copy of its decision making processes. whenim64, the news reported that an 'independent' doctor examine Janner and decided he wasn't fit to be interviewed. Contrast that with so many other occasions when interviews have gone ahead!

I did not think that being unlikely to offend again was a reason for not being prosecuted. I understand that this person may have dementia but very old frail and demented individuals have been pursued by Nazi hunters to general applause, so why the difference here? Jimmy Saville was dead and thus unable to stand trial, this has not stopped enquiries that have established his guilt. I hope that the old sodomite Janner is having nightmares in his dementia, is terrified and scared to go to sleep. just like his victims. The Police are obviously very angry about this.

Anyone remember the Guinness share trading fraud (trial about 1990)? One of the defendants, Ernest Saunders, was released when his defence claimed he was suffering from dementia. After his release, Saunders miraculously recovered from his dementia.
All accused of this heinous crime MUST be prosecuted.

I remember that Knowsley and wasn't there a similar issue with Richard Nixon and Watergate

I don't have the technical skills to post a link but if anyone is interested, google the needle blog where you'll find the CPS statement setting out the decision not to prosecute. It makes horrific reading. Lord J has been accused of serious crimes over many years but never prosecuted.

It stinks of cover up at a high level, just like the background to the Cyril Smith case.

whenim64 makes a good point, unless Lord J is on a locked ward he remains a risk to children. Paedophiles don't grow out of it because they're old!

An 'independent' doctor who deals with dementia patients isn't sufficient. I know of dementia patients with convictions for sexual offending who continue to be sexually aggressive, dementia patients who still understand the difference between right and wrong, legal and illegal, and dementia patients who can still accept responsibility for their actions. He needs to be assessed by a doctor who specialises in forensic assessment and treatment of dementia patients who have committed sexual offences. There are plenty of them around.

Saunders was tried and convicted and spent 10 months in jail before he was released due to his supposed dementia, though.

I don't see how anyone can have a fair trial if they are genuinely suffering from dementia. How could they possibly defend themselves if they can't remember what happened, when or even if it did?

I'm not making any excuses for Janner or any other alleged criminal but woudn't it be morally wrong to convict and imprison someone who has no idea what's going on or why they are where they are?