"The London home of Lord Janner has been searched as part of an inquiry into allegations of child abuse, Leicestershire Police has confirmed. He has not been arrested and has not been interviewed under caution. Leicestershire Police said it had 'executed a search warrant at a property in Barnet, north London, as part of an ongoing criminal inquiry."On 9 July 2014, The Daily Mirror reported thus:
"A Labour peer facing more than 20 allegations of historical child abuse looks set to avoid prosecution after doctors said he was unfit to be quizzed because he has dementia. The member of the House of Lords will not be interviewed or arrested by police investigating the alleged sexual assaults, which include claims of rape, on vulnerable boys in children’s homes.
Officers have compiled a dossier of more than 20 complaints against the peer, who was previously accused of child abuse more than two decades ago. At the time, the serving MP agreed to be interviewed by police and a file was passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions, but no charges were ever brought.”
Here are some of the things that were said in her statement:
“Concern has been expressed publicly of a ‘cover up’. The allegations that have been made against Lord Janner are extremely serious. Those who have made them are, entirely understandably, vociferous in urging the taking of action against Lord Janner…A whitewash then.
The CPS considers that some of the decisions made by both itself and by the police in relation to past investigations relating to Lord Janner were wrong…
The CPS is in no sense deciding or implying that the allegations that have been made are established or that Lord Janner is guilty of any offence….
In relation to Operation Enamel, more than a dozen individuals made allegations to police relating to Lord Janner. Most of them were residents in Leicestershire children's homes between 1970 and the mid to late 1980s… Material was still being passed to the CPS shortly before Easter 2015.
In relation to the allegations investigated in Operation Enamel, the CPS considers that the evidential test was passed on the basis that the evidence is sufficient to have warranted charging and prosecuting Lord Janner… In relation to the other three previous investigations, the CPS also now considers that the evidential test was passed. It follows… that mistakes were made in the decision making at the time by both the Leicestershire police in 2002 and the CPS in 1991 and 2007. Lord Janner should have been prosecuted in relation to those complaints…
It is of obvious and particular concern that such proceedings did not take place as a result of what the CPS now consider to be wrong decisions…
The CPS’s conclusion, for the reasons that follow, is that it would not be in the public interest to launch criminal proceedings now. At the outset, it is emphasised that but for medical considerations, it would undoubtedly have been in the public interest to prosecute. Public interest factors in favour of a prosecution include that the allegations are of very serious offending; the complainants were young, vulnerable children and the allegations involve the alleged abuse of power and position…
In 2009, Lord Janner was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease… Four medical experts, all experienced and highly qualified, have examined Lord Janner, two instructed by his own legal team, two by the police and prosecutors. The most recent medical report is dated 31 March 2015. The key findings are as follows:
Lord Janner is suffering from a degenerative dementia which is rapidly becoming more severe. He requires continuous care both day and night. His evidence could not be relied upon in court and he could not have any meaningful engagement with the court process, and the court would find it impossible to proceed...
All four doctors were in general agreement as to the level of cognitive ability. The condition will only deteriorate, there is no prospect of recovery...
There is no risk of future offending.”
As was to be expected. Cyril Smith and Leon Brittan got away with it by shuffling off the mortal, why shouldn’t a former Chairman of the Jewish Board of Deputies who was ennobled by Tony Blair almost as soon as he became Prime Minister get away with it as well?
I wonder why, despite the fulsome acceptance that ‘mistakes were made,’ that ‘Janner should have been prosecuted,’ not just right now but on ‘three previous’ occasions, this was said:
“The CPS is in no sense deciding or implying that the allegations that have been made are established or that Lord Janner is guilty of any offence.”We got the answer on the same day the above was published when Janner’s family released this statement:
“Lord Janner is a man of great integrity and high repute with a long and unblemished record of public service. He is entirely innocent of any wrongdoing… As the Crown Prosecution Service indicated today, this decision does not mean or imply that any of the allegations that have been made are established or that Lord Janner is guilty of any offence."Despite the familial bull, a Labour ‘spokesman’ felt obliged to inform us thus:
"In the light of these very serious allegations, Lord Janner has been suspended from the Labour party."
He added:
"When you have 20-plus people alleging very powerful evidence, then you have the stuff of a court case and a possible conviction. His age and dementia is no reason for him not to face trial... We are talking about extremely serious allegations of a very serious nature, involving children. Whether he is 86 or 96, he should be held to account."Quite. Indeed, Janner himself, was quoted thus in the 12 May 2011 edition of The Jewish Chronicle after 91-year-old John Demjanjuk was found guilty of Nazi war crimes:
"Age or poor health cannot absolve anyone of appalling crimes. Today represents a triumph of justice!"Sixteen months later he was still hammering home the same geriatric-bashing message:
"No concessions to age or the time that has passed can be made when it comes to justice for crimes of this magnitude… I don’t care what bloody age they are!”(Jewish Chronicle: 7 September 2012)These statements were made at a time when he might have demonstrated a little more sympathy towards the frailties associated with ‘age’ and ‘poor health,’ seeing as he, himself, had been ‘diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease’ in 2009.
A cynic might be excused for thinking that the 2009 diagnosis was commissioned to provide insurance against the events that have since come to pass. Especially since Janner was taking an extremely active part in the proceedings of the House of Lords right up until the police interviewed him in December 2013. As The Daily Mail told us on 18 April 2015:
“Janner attended the House of Lords almost daily and claimed more than £100,000 in expenses in the four years after he was diagnosed with the disease. He only stopped attending Parliament, and claiming up to £300 a day for doing so, when child abuse police raided his house on December 2013. Even in that month he attended the Lords 12 times.”Labour MP, Simon Danczuk, said:
“I have seen him in Parliament and he looked in quite good health to me."
“Janner signed a letter (signature redacted on left) saying he wanted to remain a peer just a week before he was ruled unfit to face child sex charges… The peer was apparently well enough to sign his name in an April 9 note to Lords authorities.”Not completely ga-ga then.
And, though the DPP assures us ‘he could not have any meaningful engagement with the court process,’ he, demonstrably, is still able to have a meaningful engagement with the ‘Lords authorities.’
"If you are putting yourself forward to remain a legislator, then surely you are fit enough to be tested before the law... If he has got a leave of absence from the Lords, that implies that he may get well. Why isn’t he retiring? It makes a mockery of it all. He is bringing the House of Lords into disrepute almost single-handedly."The redoubtable Peter Saunders added:
“He couldn’t have signed this letter if he was non compos mentis. But if he isn’t compos mentis, there’s no way he should be anywhere near our legislature.On the same day, The Mail also reported as follows:
How can they say he’s not fit to stand trial for the most serious of crimes when he himself has argued that age should not be a barrier to prosecuting Nazi war criminals?
It stinks of the Establishment covering up and ensuring he doesn’t have to take the stand in public. This is a cover-up, there can be no question about it...
This letter is a clear blow to the lie that this man is suffering. If he understands something as important as taking leave from the British legislature then surely he is fit to stand trial."
“The CPS was today accused of double standards for not prosecuting Lord Janner after it emerged at least 19 men with dementia have been convicted of child sex offences since 2010, including ten in the past year…On 20 April, The Times told us this:
Some paedophiles, including several too ill to enter a plea, have still been prosecuted and in some cases jailed for the rest of their lives because of historic sex attacks.”
“The principal legal adviser to the Director of Public Prosecutions is a barrister who worked in the same chambers as the son of Lord Janner of Braunstone until late last year... The Crown Prosecution Service has confirmed that Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecutions, consulted Neil Moore, who was based at the 23 Essex Street chambers where Daniel Janner, QC, works.”Previously I used the word 'whitewash.' I could just as easily have used the terms 'stitch-up,' 'fix,' 'shaft' or, even better, 'double-cross,' couldn't I?
Strangely, a variety of establishment bigwigs have spoken out against Alison Saunders' decision not to prosecute a Jewish gent 'of great integrity and high repute.' Which is highly unusual to say the least. Very few are inclined to rock the Pharisees' boat these days, for fear of the inevitable career-ending backlash.
Anyway, subsequent to Saunders waving the get-out-of-jail-free card in Janner's direction, the great and the good were falling over themselves to stick the boot into the DPP. To whit:
"This decision is not just wrong, it is wholly perverse and is contrary to any notion of natural justice.I cannot believe that any right-minded person will understand or support it."
“Thanks primarily to the courage of 25 victims who have made a complaint and the complete professionalism of the investigation team, we have built a case that the DPP has acknowledged is the result of a thorough investigation, evidentially sufficient and gives rise to a realistic chance of conviction.
There is credible evidence that this man carried out some of the most serious sexual crimes imaginable over three decades against children who were highly vulnerable and the majority of whom were in care.
I am extremely worried about the impact the decision not to prosecute him will have on those people, and more widely I am worried about the message this decision sends out to others , both past and present, who have suffered and are suffering sexual abuse.
We are exploring what possible legal avenues there may be to challenge this decision and victims themselves have a right to review under a CPS procedure...
For the victims, this process has been traumatic, having to relive appalling events from their childhood which have scarred their adult lives. For some experienced investigators, it has been utterly harrowing listening to their accounts.
Despite the decision of the DPP, our determination to seek justice for those who have been abused as children, particularly by those who have used their 'status' to facilitate such crimes, remains undeterred.“
"I was very concerned when I heard about this decision.I have been very clear in everything I have said so far about the child sexual abuse issue…
I expect to see justice done."
"It might have been wiser for the CPS to say ‘we’re going to have this matter resolved in the full public glare of a courtroom rather than simply by the DPP."
"It is a matter of great regret that I was never informed of the existence of this case in 2007. If it had been referred to me, I would certainly have given it my close and robust personal attention."
"It should not be a matter for her (Saunders) to decide. The matter should be brought before the courts so that the evidence may be tested in accordance with the law.This case clearly demonstrates why victims of abuse feel let down by the system."
Richard Kovalevsky, QC:
"A finding that the acts took place may have consequences for the defendant, particularly one who has the benefit of an honour from the Queen."The aforementioned Simon Danczuk:
“Mrs Saunders is now seen as a roadblock to justice and it’s hard to see how her position remains tenable.”
"The vast majority of people will view this as a cover-up."
“I am surprised someone who is able to send a letter on parliamentary business is seen as too demented to stand trial.”Mann's intervention would have to be the 'strangest' of all as he is a thousand light years up the behind of the movers and shakers of World Jewry. (Check out the Anti-Semitism Scam) Perhaps, ahead of the latest batch of Jew-enhancing legislation Mann has been pressing for, his masters have decided that a sacrificial goat is required to shore up his 'man-of-the-people' credentials. Knowing, all the while, that, though the 'great integrity and high repute' reputation of the paedo peer will be forever besmirched, he will serve no time for his crimes.
That's my best guess.
On 21 April 2015, Mann and Danczuk, along with Conservatives Zac Goldsmith, Nadine Dorries and Sarah Wollaston, Lib Dems John Hemming and Tessa Munt and Mark Reckless (UKIP); Caroline Lucas (Green); Naomi Long (Alliance Party) and Jim Shannon of the DUP signed the following statement published in The Times:
"We were encouraged last year by the commitment from the director of public prosecutions, Alison Saunders, to pursue justice for sexual abuse victims whether their cases were '30 days or 30 years old.' She stated the public would be horrified if she did not do this, yet she has decided not to put Lord Janner of Braunstone on trial for alleged historic child abuse. Have we learnt anything from the mistakes of the past?
As long as justice is not seen to be done and the greater public interest is not served, the public will see attempts to investigate establishment figures involved in historic child abuse as a whitewash.
The CPS has acknowledged the case against Lord Janner passes its evidential test, and there are established precedents in proceeding with cases against defendants with advanced dementia. Defendants have been charged with child abuse and found guilty in their absence. One man’s ill health cannot be a barrier to the greater public interest.
Clearly this is damaging public confidence. Mrs Saunders must recognise this and immediately reverse her decision."
“He has blighted my life… How can [the Crown Prosecution Service] publicise the fact that there was enough evidence to charge, yet then say it is not in the public interest to pursue it?”One of the 25 alleged victims of Janner's paedophilic inclinations who gave evidence to the police said he was ‘being protected’ and added:
"If he was an everyday person with a normal life and job, justice would have been served... Let someone feel the pain and suffering that I’ve endured and still going to endure for the rest of my life. It’s not a case of being found guilty or going to prison, it’s about being believed after so long being told that we were lying. Justice needs to be served."On 18 April 2015, The Sunday Mirror told us that 'an abuse survivor, known as 'Nick' claims Janner sexually assaulted him at several unidentified venues in London between 1979 and 1982... Asked how Janner abused him, victim Nick said:
"Everything, including rape."Nick added:
“They say he can’t stand trial because he can’t defend himself and he will not understand what is happening. As children, we could not defend ourselves and did not understand what was happening. It did not stop us from being abused.”
"The Establishment, in the shape of fellow MPs, men such as Labour's Keith Vaz, Tory David Ashby and the then Lib Dem MP now Lord Carlile, closed ranks. Janner was a barrister and MP, a man who had campaigned for justice for victims of the Holocaust. It simply couldn't be true."The parliamentarians cited above, Vaz, Ashby and Carlile, are Asian, a chap who lost a libel case against a newspaper that said he was homosexual, and Jewish, respectively.
"Survivors of sex abuse say they have received death threats and been approached by their abusers, after MPs published their details online last week.
Keith Vaz, the chair of the inquiry, published an unedited version of the 96-page document...
In a letter to Home Secretary Theresa May... a group of 18 victims... said... 'named individuals/survivors have been subjected to social media hate campaigns as a result of the disclosures and negative attitudes expressed by some panel members... It has exposed us as individuals, making us feel vulnerable and having a huge impact on our work and organisations... We have received death threats'...
Theresa May has written to Mr Vaz describing her 'dismay' at the publication of the documents."
"There was a peculiar mood in Parliament on the day they first discussed the allegation that Greville Janner, then the Labour MP for Leicester West, had abused a youth in a care home...
His fellow MPs did not simply dismiss the accusations as improbable; they praised their accused colleague as a fine public servant who had endured a terrible experience with dignity. And they demanded a change in the law so that an innocent man could not be put through such an ordeal ever again...
This was not just a case of the Labour Party protecting one of its own. Though Labour’s Keith Vaz, a fellow Leicester MP, rose to deplore the 'cowardly and wicked' slur on a 'distinguished' colleague; the majority of the MPs who spoke in Janner’s defence were Conservatives.On 21 April 2015, the aforementioned David Ashby, who, according to The Daily Mail, 'stood down from Parliament in 1997 after being caught up in the Major government’s sleaze scandals,' was quoted thus by that newspaper:
The debate was initiated by David Ashby, Conservative MP for North West Leicestershire, who paid tribute to Janner as an 'honoured colleague' who had been unfairly put through 'living hell.'
Ashby would endure his own version of 'living hell' two years later when his marriage broke up and it became known that he had shared a bed with a man. He claimed that only someone with a 'dirty mind' could think that the relationship was homosexual...
Janner was best known as a friend of Israel and a campaigner for victims of Nazism... He made his last speech – fittingly on Israel and Palestine – in February 2013. The register shows that he was a regular attender in the Lords until the end of December 2013.
During the 1990s, there were very elderly men still at large who were suspected of being involved in Nazi atrocities, but whose age and mental condition raised questions about whether it was worth pursuing them. In January 1997, an Old Bailey jury decided that a man aged 86, the age Lord Janner is now, was too ill to stand trial... Janner’s reaction, as chairman of the Holocaust Educational Trust, makes interesting reading in the light of yesterday’s decision by the prosecution service. He said:
'I am sorry that he was not tried while he was fit enough to stand. War criminals have managed to evade prosecution under our system of justice for decades. There were absolutely no reasons why he should have escaped charges for ever'."
"The man has dementia and should be left alone."I guess he would say that, wouldn't he?
On 23 April 2015, The Daily Mail informed us that Janner’s alleged dementia had had little affect on his inner calculator.
“Lord Janner signed over the deeds of his £2million home to his children at the height of the police paedophile case against him. It puts the luxury apartment out of reach for potential child abuse victims suing the peer for compensation.
His flat… was transferred free of charge to his two daughters and son in March last year, the same month that police raided his Westminster office.”On 25 April 2015, The Mail told us that, in 1983, Alison Saunders began her legal career ‘IN THE SAME IN LEGAL CHAMBERS WHERE LORD JANNER HAD PRACTISED… FROM THE MID-1950S!’
Pete Saunders commented thus:
“On the evidence how can we not conclude that they might be covering for each other. It is scandalous and an insult to to all the survivors who have spent decades fighting to get themselves heard.”Scandalous. Not exaggerating, is he?
On 26 April 2015, The Mail added:
“A senior detective who investigated child abuse allegations against Labour politician Greville Janner has revealed he was ordered to drop the case 'from the very top' – despite uncovering compelling evidence to charge him.
Breaking a 24-year silence over the scandal, former Detective Inspector Kelvyn Ashby told The Mail on Sunday that during an investigation lasting several months in 1991, he found vital clues that backed up claims that Janner had molested a teenage boy at his marital home and a hotel.
Last night the retired policeman spoke of his anger after being ordered not to arrest Janner because he was an MP. Mr Ashby said: 'I felt we had done a good job. I felt we had enough to arrest him but we didn't because he was an MP. I think we should have done. I was gutted that we didn't’…
Officers went to the North London home where the boy was allegedly abused by Janner and found that it matched his description exactly, with an en suite bathroom off the master bedroom. They also proved that Janner had stayed at the hotel in Scotland where he was said to have taken the boy…
Mr Ashby said… 'Someone higher-up told us that we couldn't just arrest an MP and it went no further. We were told that by someone senior, who I can't name, but the order had to have come from the very top…
Janner should have been arrested. He was treated differently because he was an MP… The bit that really got me was that I later got a Christmas card in the post from Greville Janner. The card was an official House of Commons Christmas card and was handwritten. It said something like 'I was very pleased with the way you treated me' and invited me and my wife for a dinner at the House of Commons…
'My wife was disgusted, as was I’.”Disgusted. Bit of a euphemism there, I reckon.
Do you know what ‘chutzpah’ is?
Here’s the Oxford English Dictionary definition:
“Extreme self-confidence or audacity (usually used approvingly):
‘… love him or hate him, you have to admire Cohen’s chutzpah'."The OED’s use of the Jewish surname, Cohen, is not coincidental. As they state, the term is ‘late 19th century: Yiddish.’
Chutzpah: a word coined by Jews to describe an archetypical aspect of Jewish behaviour. Janner’s Christmas card invitation to his thwarted adversary is perfect example of it.
However, ‘extreme self-coincidence’ comes from somewhere. In this case, one supposes it came from a certain knowledge that he was beyond the law.
He still is. And, outside of a second civil war, I’m guessing he always will be.
The DDP, no less, says there will be no trial because he’s demented.
Demented and the DPP who describes him thus began her career in the same legal chambers.
Demented and ‘the principal legal adviser to the DPP… worked in the same chambers as the son of Lord Janner… until late last year.’
Demented, yet he’s smart enough to sign over his wealth to his kids before his victims sue the b***ocks off him.
Demented, yet he was compos mentis enough to sign a letter stating his wish to remain a peer just one week before Saunders insisted he was away with the fairies.
And free as bird, courtesy of dementia, despite the fact that plenty of other aged and demented souls have recently been tried in a British court of law.
‘Disgusted’ is a euphemism all right. The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Greville Janner is as guilty as sin and his crimes are of the highest order.
And yet he will never be tried.
Alison Sunders says so.
If and when the much vaunted inquiry ever gets off the ground one supposes that any dirty b*ggers exposed by the process and still with us will be well past the age of dementia, as defined by Greville Janner, the medical professionals and the legal eagles, when its finding are finally made known.
As some in the elite circles in which Janner moves are suspected of ending the lives of one or two of the unfortunate boys they abused, it doesn’t take much imagination to conclude that they, too, might employ the same ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ card, a little while before twelve good men and true find the killers ‘guilty as sin’ in a British court of law.
If this actually happens, the perverts in question will, quite literally, be getting away with murder.
"Do 'pervert' MPs enjoy immunity from prosecution?"They do when they're elite members of the British establishment, Peter. Especially when they happen to be Jewish. And, boy-oh-boy, is the gentleman in question Jewish. This from his official parliamentary page:
Vice-President - The Jewish Leadership Council: 2010-
President: Association of Jewish Ex-Servicemen and Women: 2009-
Member of the Advisory Board Community Security Trust: 2006-
Joint-President, Founder and Trustee: The Coexistence Trust: 2005-
Chairman: Lord Forte Foundation: 1995-11
Founder and President: Maimonides Foundation: 1993-02
Vice-President World Jewish Congress: 1991-
Founder, President of World Executive Int. Parliamentary Council Against Anti-Semitism: 1990-97 Founding Chairman International Council of Jewish Parliamentarians: 1988-
Chairman and Co-Founder The Holocaust Educational Trust: 1987-
President: Jewish Museum: 1985-01
Board of Directors United Jewish Israel Appeal: 1985-
President and Co-Founder The Commonwealth Jewish Council: 1982-
President: National Council of Soviet Jewry: 1979-85
President: The Board of Deputies of British Jews: 1979-85
Vice-President: Association for Jewish Youth: 1970-
Sponsorship by:
World Jewish Congress; Commonwealth Jewish Trust; World Jewish Affairs Fund.
Greville Janner is an untouchable, Peter. That's your answer. You know, the politically incorrect, unacceptably accurate one?
We're just not supposed to say it.
”A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.“ (Sanhedrin 54b)
”When a man commits sodomy with a boy under nine years of age, it is not deemed as pederasty." (Sanhedrin 54b, 55a)
”Sexual intercourse with a boy under the age of eight is lawful since it isn’t fornication." (Sanhedrin 69b)The way we behave has to come from somewhere, doesn't it?
One last thing.
In Alison Saunders' 16 April statement she quotes a 'key finding' of 'the most recent medical report,' (31 March 2015) which said this of Janner's condition:
"Manipulation (‘putting it on’) is out of the question."I say those who compiled that report, Ms Saunders and the untouchable who 'attended the Lords 12 times' in the month the cops raided his home are taking the mickey.
What do you say?
Keith Vaz helped kill a 90s probe into Greville Janner: why is he silent now?
Home Office ignored FOURTH Janner warning! Officials told of child sex claims in 1995!
Doubts are growing over severity of Janner’s dementia
Janner could face dementia test? (That'll be the day)
The friends of Greville Janner
Janner isn't being prosecuted but ten with dementia WERE in the last year!
Janner detective: We had proof 20 years ago... Top brass told us to stop
Lord Janner's child sex abuse covered up by cops/social workers for over 20 years!
Up to 30 Janner victims? File on him among 114 lost by Home Office
UK's top prosecutor 'ignored advice of QCs who told her to charge Janner
Senior MPs attack failure to charge Janner over child abuse
Janner: Keith Vaz was among MPs who defended Janner against child sex allegations
Janner was a pillar of the Jewish community, say family
Janner abused me at 15. Why has he never faced a court?
Legal chief facing growing calls to quit
Do 'pervert' MPs enjoy immunity from prosecution?
Theresa May turns heat on DPP
Janner spoke in Lords after dementia diagnosis and only stopped when cops raided his home
Paedo peer abuse allegations were not passed to me says former DPP
Child Abuse: Lord Janner's home searched
Janner failed to answer - then and now
A Labour peer, magic tricks and dementia
Not surprisingly it has just come to light that this piece of filth transferred his wealth to his children shortly after he was interviewed by the police. I hope the 7 year rule stands and his victims take action and get a result before that 7 years is up, so his victims can get maximum compensation and his offspring find themselves with nothing.
ReplyDelete