Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Greville Janner To Face Justice Afterall
http://
This falls short of a full trial but its better than nothing. We must thank
Simon Danczuk for all his efforts in keeping the pot simmering in this case.
This falls short of a full trial but its better than nothing. We must thank
Simon Danczuk for all his efforts in keeping the pot simmering in this case.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Well, as I see it, as he has now been deemed fit to stand trial, any leniency awarded by the Judge ( if he is found guilty, of course ) may indeed include Janners medical health. That will be up to the Judge to decide.
To be honest, if this goes to trial and the facts are examined properly, its all I will ask for. Other celebrities that are suspected of similar crimes, and I don't need to mention them, should understand that the justice system is now taking the issue of historical sexual abuse seriously, as it always should have done but didn't.
To be honest, if this goes to trial and the facts are examined properly, its all I will ask for. Other celebrities that are suspected of similar crimes, and I don't need to mention them, should understand that the justice system is now taking the issue of historical sexual abuse seriously, as it always should have done but didn't.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
A Judge will now decide if Janner is fit to stand trial. If he is, than a normal prosecution will go ahead.
If the Judge decides that he is NOT fit, than he will face what is known as a "trial of the facts", where a court hears evidence from alleged victims and decides only if Lord Janner committed the physical acts of abuse. There will be no finding of guilt or conviction.
What his alleged victims want is to be listened too, in a public arena, and this procedure will give them that...justice of sorts.
Either way, the case will be heard in a court of law, a complete change from April. I saw Saunders being interviewed on Ch4 news last night, and on the evidence of her performance, I see no reason why she should not be sacked, rather than wait for her to resign.
More importantly, I eagerly await the enquiry into why he was not prosecuted on the numerous occasions over the last 25 years, when the previous DPPs didn't act. There was no sign of any dementia in 1991, when Janner was identified in Court as a paedophile.
In September 2014, The Times reported that Mike Creedon, currently the Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary, claimed that in 1989, whilst he was serving as a Detective Sergeant, senior police chiefs severely limited his enquiries into paedophilia allegations against Janner, despite 'credible evidence' that warranted further investigation.
If the Judge decides that he is NOT fit, than he will face what is known as a "trial of the facts", where a court hears evidence from alleged victims and decides only if Lord Janner committed the physical acts of abuse. There will be no finding of guilt or conviction.
What his alleged victims want is to be listened too, in a public arena, and this procedure will give them that...justice of sorts.
Either way, the case will be heard in a court of law, a complete change from April. I saw Saunders being interviewed on Ch4 news last night, and on the evidence of her performance, I see no reason why she should not be sacked, rather than wait for her to resign.
More importantly, I eagerly await the enquiry into why he was not prosecuted on the numerous occasions over the last 25 years, when the previous DPPs didn't act. There was no sign of any dementia in 1991, when Janner was identified in Court as a paedophile.
In September 2014, The Times reported that Mike Creedon, currently the Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary, claimed that in 1989, whilst he was serving as a Detective Sergeant, senior police chiefs severely limited his enquiries into paedophilia allegations against Janner, despite 'credible evidence' that warranted further investigation.
// There was no sign of any dementia in 1991, when Janner was identified in Court as a paedophile. //
um ya that is the problem with the case and this thread
not everything you hear in court ... is true but can be still be reported under current rules. In fact in an acquittal case you may wonder if anything heard in court was true but that doesnt stop the hacks.
There is confusion about what is gonna happen -as this is the fist time a review has overturned a DPP decision.
The case as to facts seems to be some sort of civil service fudge to be honest. iN the good old days there was a hearing about fitness to plead, and if the old boy wasnt fit to plead then there were cases where they went to prison anyway indefinitely ( even tho it was later shown they were mad but innocent ) ( oops) ( o well it didnt matter they were mad anyway )
um ya that is the problem with the case and this thread
not everything you hear in court ... is true but can be still be reported under current rules. In fact in an acquittal case you may wonder if anything heard in court was true but that doesnt stop the hacks.
There is confusion about what is gonna happen -as this is the fist time a review has overturned a DPP decision.
The case as to facts seems to be some sort of civil service fudge to be honest. iN the good old days there was a hearing about fitness to plead, and if the old boy wasnt fit to plead then there were cases where they went to prison anyway indefinitely ( even tho it was later shown they were mad but innocent ) ( oops) ( o well it didnt matter they were mad anyway )
PP...due to corruption and incompetence in the past, Janner was not prosecuted when he should have been. We can't put the clocks back, so we have no choice but accept this second-best scenario that we have now.
But I would still like to see the enquiry into past decisions, by past DPP's, to show us the truth. It may make help us to understand why other high-profile paedophiles were not dealt with properly.
But I would still like to see the enquiry into past decisions, by past DPP's, to show us the truth. It may make help us to understand why other high-profile paedophiles were not dealt with properly.
hi Mikey you are doing sterling work I see on Broseph's thread
//PP...due to corruption and incompetence in the past, Janner was not prosecuted when he should have been.//
actually the only thing you can conclude from the above - is that J was not put on trial previously
we dont know if he should have been on the evidence and rules then available. I am not a fan of historical abuse cases to be honest likewise war crimes trials for the same reason that is. memory can be at fault
and you have no evidence for corruption and incompetence - they may have been following the rules then in force
ergo
//PP...due to corruption and incompetence in the past, Janner was not prosecuted when he should have been.//
actually the only thing you can conclude from the above - is that J was not put on trial previously
we dont know if he should have been on the evidence and rules then available. I am not a fan of historical abuse cases to be honest likewise war crimes trials for the same reason that is. memory can be at fault
and you have no evidence for corruption and incompetence - they may have been following the rules then in force
ergo
// Sandy...I am not sure if compensation is really a big issue here.//
I am
It is
everyone says they only want an apology - they dont. they want money.
If they get a leedol money they feel OK
If they get a lot of money they feel .. good.
The Bloody Sunday enquiry cost around £150m. christ why not just give each bereaved fambly ten million quid ?
I am
It is
everyone says they only want an apology - they dont. they want money.
If they get a leedol money they feel OK
If they get a lot of money they feel .. good.
The Bloody Sunday enquiry cost around £150m. christ why not just give each bereaved fambly ten million quid ?
PP...here is the Wiki entry for Janner ::
https:/
From my reading of it, there was plenty of evidence that he should have been tried in Court, on numerous previous occasions. The Police have said that there was overwhelming indications that there was enough evidence that he had a case to answer.
I still stand by my view that this was caused by a combination of corruption and incompetence, until proved otherwise by the current review announced by Saunders.
Thanks for your support re other posts. I just wish the other left wingers on here would stand up and be counted, instead of it being you and I, and a very others every time. But I am always up for ruck !
https:/
From my reading of it, there was plenty of evidence that he should have been tried in Court, on numerous previous occasions. The Police have said that there was overwhelming indications that there was enough evidence that he had a case to answer.
I still stand by my view that this was caused by a combination of corruption and incompetence, until proved otherwise by the current review announced by Saunders.
Thanks for your support re other posts. I just wish the other left wingers on here would stand up and be counted, instead of it being you and I, and a very others every time. But I am always up for ruck !
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.