Question For New Judge On The Janner Affair

[mikey4444]

NJ

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-32360661

I heard the former CPS Chief Lord Macdonald being interviewed this morning, on the Today Program. He "favours a limited court hearing to establish the facts of the alleged abuse"

Leaving aside the minutiae of the whole affair, how would a "limited court hearing" work, if the current CPS have decided that Janner cannot be put on trial ?

Under what auspices could this hearing be heard, and what conclusion could it come to, other than underline the charges that he would have faced
( these have already been outlined by the CPS in the Media)

Its the legal angle I am after unwrapping !

[jno]

if they can establish the facts without the accused being there to deny them or defend himself, we could do away with proper trials altogether and save ever so much money.

[sandyRoe]

His family strongly deny any wrongdoing on his part. They would, wouldn't they?

[mikey4444]

JNO.......I am tending to side with you on this issue. To do this with Cyril Smith, or Savile is one thing, but when the suspect is still alive, I am uneasy. But its the legal issue that I hope NJ can help us with.

Sandy....I recall that Savile's family started off being in denial but as the evidence was overwhelming, they soon realised that their position was untenable. We never hear from them nowadays...even any trace of his grave disappeared.

[New Judge]

I really don't understand what such a hearing would achieve, Mikey. The (current) DPP has decided that no charges shall be brough due to Janner's medical problems. As far as I know there is no route to appeal that decision. Unless Lord McDonald has in mind action being taken against those whose neglect, ineptitude or malicious intent failed to secure earlier action against Lord Janner, I really cannot see how any hearing, "limited" or otherwise will help. Obviously Lord Janner has far greater knowledge of such matters than I have, but I have no idea what form such a hearing would take, where it would be held, who would preside over it or what its aims would be. I can only think of some sort of judicial review, but what its aims would be is hard to fathom.

[retrocop]

jno
You want to kick this into the long grass?










Right to a Jury Trial


What is a Jury Trial

At the foundation of the UK law is the notion that anyone who is accused of a crime should have the right to be tried in front of their peers. Essentially it is a process whereby 12 individuals randomly selected are put in the court environment to determine the facts of the case and to decide, either unanimously or by majority of 10 people whether the accused individual is guilty or not of the alleged crimes.

[mikey4444]

Thanks NJ....it is exactly what I thought when I heard the interview this morning. I suppose its enough that we know what the current CPS would charge him with, if a trial were to go ahead. To refresh our memories ::

"In a statement, Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders said there was enough evidence to charge him with:

Fourteen indecent assaults on a male under 16 between 1969 and 1988

Two indecent assaults between 1984 and 1988

Four counts of buggery of a male under 16 between 1972 and 1987

Two counts of buggery between 1977 and 1988"

[ichkeria]

I thnk the point Lord MacDonald was making was that this might serve to restore some faith in the system given the failings of the past. Whether that is a valid position or not I cannot say but that I think was his reasoning

[mikey4444]

ichkeria....I think Lord Mac has his heart in the right place, but as we now know, courtesy of the CPS, what Janner would be charged with, I am not sure what else could be achieved by anything less than a real trial.

What I am afraid of here is that this massive cock-up by the "Establishment" may have out the investigation of historical sexual abuse back years. If victims can see that they and their claims are not being taken seriously, perhaps they will stop coming forward in the first place.

[Orderlimit]

Mikey, - Try looking at the Crim Law & Justice Weekly website in a week or so, most of the hot subjects are available free of charge after a short period so worth a check.

http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/

Off topic, but I see that a 96 yr old has just been given a custodial sentence for historic sexual offences making him Britain's oldest prisoner !!!

[sandyRoe]

Had that 96 year old not the wit to pretend he'd lost his wits?

[woofgang]

Is the CPS' decision final and binding? If enough factual unassailable evidence could be derived from such a hearing might the CPS change its position?

[sandyRoe]

Janner couldn't have a fair trial if he couldn't defend himself. He's escaped justice.

[Orderlimit]

"Had that 96 year old not the wit to pretend he'd lost his wits?"

That's exactly what i was thinking Sandyroe :)

[Quizmonster]

Not strictly relevant to the question, but I thought the following letter in today's Times worth repeating...
"When John Demjanjuk was convicted in 2011 of being an accessory to the murder of 28,000 Jews during the Second World War, Lord Janner said,"Today's verdict sends an unequivocal message: that the passage of time is no barrier to justice. Age or poor health cannot absolve anyone of appalling crimes."
Another letter in the same collection expressed the hope that Lord Janner's dementia was not of the same kind that Ernest Saunders miraculously recovered from!

[mikey4444]

QM...very interesting !

[sandyRoe]

"Age or poor health cannot absolve anyone of appalling crimes."
True enough. But when ill health reduces someone to a hulk of their former selves the law is merciful enough not to look to convict them.

[THECORBYLOON]

A CPS decision can be challenged as per this link, http://www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/victims_right_to_review/

[sandyRoe]

Lets accept for the sake of argument that Janner is in the last stages of dementia. How could he be tried? He wouldn't understand what was going on in the courtroom or present any sort of defence.

[mikey4444]

Much as I would prefer matters to be different, if Janner is as far gone with dementia as he is supposed to be, I can't see how he could possibly be successfully tried and convicted.

I am much more interested in whey he wasn't brought to trial when he was perfectly well. Questions need to be asked, and if necessary, heads must roll.

[Khandro]

Why does the accused have to understand 'what's going on'?