Lord Janner to be prosecuted (sort of.)

www.exaronews.com...

A trial of the facts, so it appears. I sincerely hope they'll be closely examining his dementia to be sure that the diagnosis is correct. He seems to have been fairly active for a man with Alzheimer's.

a reply to: Midnightmosesuk

Reminds me of a mob boss on trial. Rule #1 - Act crazy.

If he's guilty he deserves to rot in jail.

Since his alleged diagnosis of Alzheimer's he has attended the house of lords, claimed expenses and even voted in the lords as well. I think the CPS were hoping all of this would just "go away" once they said that Janner was too I'll to stand trial but they underestimated the strength of public opinion.

originally posted by: Midnightmosesuk
Since his alleged diagnosis of Alzheimer's he has attended the house of lords, claimed expenses and even voted in the lords as well. I think the CPS were hoping all of this would just "go away" once they said that Janner was too I'll to stand trial but they underestimated the strength of public opinion.

Indeed. Seems it's a current theme.

What's the betting he suddenly passes away before the trial?

So, a government prosecutor refuses to prosecute child abuse allegations against a member of the government. A non-government lawyer is brought in to review the cases, and finds plenty of reason to prosecute, and it's going to trial.

As an American, I am very jealous right now. I've said many times that we need a way for private lawyers to prosecute government officials and lawyers when government prosecutors refuse to do so.

Trial of the facts would be an unsurprising copout. No possibility of a sentence and no real justice for the poor people he allegedly did that to if found guilty. There really is one law for the establishment and another for everybody else.

She said in a statement today: "I have always said that in my view this was an extremely difficult and borderline case because of the strong arguments on both sides."

Asked when Saunders had previously described the Janner decision as "borderline", a CPS spokeswoman was unable to point to any occasion by the time of publication.

Can someone remind me, which one of them is supposed to be unfit due to Alzheimer's?


www.telegraph.co.uk...

Lord Janner is a helpless, senile man who should not be prosecuted

I avoided using 'senile'. I thought it was non PC. I better list it in my book of acceptable terms. Now where did I put that book.

The trial now threatens to be a revolting spectacle in which a criminal court – egged on by sections of the press and MPs who should know better, compensation-seeking lawyers, and internet commenters, many of whom are motivated by undisguised anti-semitism – will be employed for no purpose other than further to traduce a man who can do nothing to defend himself.

traduce
verb
speak badly of or tell lies about (someone) so as to damage their reputation.
I had to look that up. Obviously didn't go to the right school.


Why are we 'undisguised anti-semites'? www.thejlc.org...

They've got it all wrong. The real reason we've got it in for him is because he's a Cambridge Lawyer.

Later, Janner read Law at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where he was President of the Cambridge Union Society...

Cambridge Union Society. www.cus.org...

Celebrating 200 Years of Free Speech and the Art of Debating

I've recently said the most blackmailable candidates get boosted into key positions in student bodies and from there cast their tentacles into wider society. That was quite a start in opinion leading. From that to a sad old man who can't even tie his own shoelaces.

Movers and shakers man that's how they operate.

Sick people ...


it's ok all that negative energy that he put out while doing what he did will all come back to him.

energy never dies .

The trial now threatens to be a revolting spectacle in which a criminal court – egged on by sections of the press and MPs who should know better, compensation-seeking lawyers, and internet commenters, many of whom are motivated by undisguised anti-semitism

Haha...hahahaha...hahahahahahaha!

Yeah, it's all about anti-semitism. They only want to prosecute him because he's jewish! Playing the jew card is a sheer act of desperation but always worth a try as far as they are concerned.

Abuse should always be prosecuted. Social standing, colour, race, religion is all irrelevant under the eyes of the law......well sometimes anyway!

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015
Trial of the facts would be an unsurprising copout. No possibility of a sentence and no real justice for the poor people he allegedly did that to if found guilty. There really is one law for the establishment and another for everybody else.

The "victims" will at least be believed and vindicated .... and for

them that will at least be an outcome. Rather than nothing at

all.

Even out of prison he will be known for what he is

and hopefully shunned by his peers and society


His family have said there is no truth in the allegations and that

he is innocent. In the famous words of one Mandy Rice Davis....

*Well they would wouldn't they?* LOL!!

a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

Given that the major factor in a case like this, involving a high ranking member of the establishment, is that victims need to be believed and have their accusations found to be accurate, this outcome although not ideal, is an awful lot better than simply leaving things as they were before the original decision not to prosecute, was overturned.

A trial of the facts will allow the victims to be heard, will establish the facts surrounding the abuse, and the nature of Janner's involvement with that abuse. This is more, much more than many of the victims were expecting to get out of the justice system, especially after the initial decision not to prosecute was made. It is worth pointing out, that a trial of the facts may not be one in which a sentence can be applied, or technical guilt apportioned to an individual, but the trial format WILL allow the court to actually confirm what happened, with whom, and when. The public will not care that the court cannot apportion guilt on a technicality, because they will know the facts of the case, and it is these which people will base their opinions on.

It will also, conviction or not, ruin Janner's name, and too bloody right as well. Whether he is legally fit for trial or not, if he was involved in child abuse, he and those who have supported him over the years, deserve everything they get, and get it they surely will.

There is a precedent for the trial of paedophiles suffering from dementia. Not just a trial of facts either, but with but proper trials with the accused spending some real time in prison.

ukpaedos-exposed.com...


ukpaedos-exposed.com...


ukpaedos-exposed.com...


I suppose that a trial of the facts is the best we can hope for but it seems rather unfair given that less influential pederasts have faced the weight of the law regardless of their physical or mental state.

a reply to: eletheia

I get that something is better than nothing, it's just sad and shameful that if found guilty he'll be free to live out what's left of his life without spending a day in prison. I'd imagine that's not a huge comfort for the victims.

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015
a reply to: eletheia

I get that something is better than nothing, it's just sad and shameful that if found guilty he'll be free to live out what's left of his life without spending a day in prison. I'd imagine that's not a huge comfort for the victims.

One of the things "victims" are told by their perpetrators is that the will never

be believed if they report the offence due to the perps 'high rank', seniority,

or position. Therefor it comes as a huge relief to the "victims" to actually

be believed


Spending time in prison may be a better option for the perpetrator as I cant

see that their former friends and colleagues will any longer want to remain

acquainted or in contact ... Do you? I fear they might be outcast from

society.

I don't think the likes of Rolf Harris or any of the others will socially be where

they once were ever again ... Do you?