Lord Geville Janner, Paedophile, family outraged over inquiry.....How can they be so brazen...

Ex British Labour MP Lord Greville Janner was a comfortably off man with a sinister past that friends in high places clearly made sure justice was not done until he had died yet his daughter quite brazenly says its accusations against a corpse. Mr Janner seemed to have liked abusing children and it became such an open secret that 20yrs ago the Police wanted to arrest him about it but his 'friends' in government blocked it.

Some links to show the level of lies

www.mirror.co.uk...
www.theguardian.com...
www.dailymail.co.uk...
www.theguardian.com...
www.gilad.co.uk...

Pretty much an open and shut case of a man using privilege to get away with child abuse, he's not the first (there were far too many to mention as it is) and I dare say he won't be the last but what makes me seethe is his stuck up daughter claiming despite ALL the material and proof that she calls all the victims liars and says its unfair to put a corpse on trial, basically she just wants him to keep his dignity and the family keep honour despite the despicable things he did and the very possible notion that the family knew.

What galls me is not wishing to try him despite his death, he was due to be arrested and taken to trial yet suddenly had an onset of 'dementia' despite appearing to be well and cognitive just before his sudden illness. Add to the fact the old guard rallied around to make sure he was kept out of custody over the years tells me that the likelihood that this is all a huge mistake is very very unlikely. I'm sorry but the man was alive when these things were going on and I don't believe a person should suddenly be forgiven for shocking crimes just because he died, these victims need justice and the family just wishing to wipe it all away like a mere inconvenience is disgusting.

This is another in the line of people in power abusing position and I don't care if they died 100yrs ago, if these people were criminals then let the victims or families of victims have some justice to at least silence the doubt about their claims that would have certainly came from people in power including Police at the time.

Personally I don't know how his daughter can sit with the facts she knows let alone the possibility of what else she may know and defend her father, and lets remember she has two sons, how about if he had made them victims, would she be so supportive then?

I doubt it, but it seems she was spared that horror so its just 'others' who had to put up with his perversions..

Link to her words here www.itv.com...

Oh and you need another thing to link him to the guilt then how about this, he got rid of personal property to family so to avoid compensation.

www.dailymail.co.uk... ml

For me this is privilege and status showing its horrendous colours again, its seems yet another sexual predator walked the corridors of power hoping forever to get away with disgusting crimes because of who they knew and how much money they had.

a reply to: Mclaneinc

Its quite simple. The reason this needs looking into now, and every possible detail being bought to light, is so that the entire systemic disease that kept him out of jail can be broken down, its elements taken to jail, and to make it easier for other abusers in similar positions to be identified, removed from their comforts and placed in jail.

This is why the inquiry must proceed, and why the selfishness of his family must be brushed aside as a comparitive irrelevance for the moment.

The family should be stripped of any and all wealth accumulated by this man and promptly given to his victims. I would just say too bad little girl. Your dad was a horrid man, your just going to have to live with it.

I am not really sure where i stand on this. At face value, Lord Janner is f*!$#*1g evil. However, it has to be said that serious questions have (again) been raised about the credibility of the key witness into these investigations. The serious questions being that the witness has previously lied under oath about abuse allegations against a seperate individual / individuals.

This keeps happening with the historic investigations. The main witnesses often turn out to be fantasists who have previously lied under oath.

Because the charges are so serious, it still should really be investigated, in my opinion. However, fundamental questions also need asking as to why the CPS keep charging people based on the testimonies of proven liars and fantasists. This isn't giving Janner's family a get out - if guilty i hope his memory is foever tarnished. However, if it turns out to be based on false testimony then his accuser should face charges also as it makes it harder for other abuse victims to come forward.

ETA:

I know 33 victims have come forward claiming Janner abused them - they can't all be lying. My point though is that the CPS still have a key witness who isn't credible and this keeps happening in historic abuse cases.

a reply to: Flavian

I suspect this may have been research for a system that creates discreditable witness later used to sabotage cases.

Another former patient of Aston Hall, Sandra, thinks she may have been encouraged to develop false memories.

www.bbc.co.uk...

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Flavian

I suspect this may have been research for a system that creates discreditable witness later used to sabotage cases.

Another former patient of Aston Hall, Sandra, thinks she may have been encouraged to develop false memories.

www.bbc.co.uk...

I had read that also and that would be a scary thought. Not sure i believe it though, simply as it seems to be extraordinary lengths to go to in order to keep paedophilia under wraps - more the thing you would expect from secretive defence programmes than child abuse (which are usually more intimidation based).

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Mclaneinc

Its quite simple. The reason this needs looking into now, and every possible detail being bought to light, is so that the entire systemic disease that kept him out of jail can be broken down, its elements taken to jail, and to make it easier for other abusers in similar positions to be identified, removed from their comforts and placed in jail.

This is why the inquiry must proceed, and why the selfishness of his family must be brushed aside as a comparitive irrelevance for the moment.

Its just annoys me that this woman goes on media no doubt with ministerial help to plead that all of this is lies and he should be left alone. This has been proven beyond all doubt that some very powerful people in the government and most likely above had / have a systematic policy of child abuse and this was safeguarded by some also powerful people and not just in government, I don't really want to bring masonic allegiances in to this but there is a common bond throughout all this at this level of power, government is built around it, the Police force, Judges and parliamentarians all share this common thread so it would be illogical to rule it out of the equation BUT whatever the issue this MUST be rooted out and destroyed. I have no issues with MP's gender or change thereof, their sexual preferences between men and women or whatever combination but abuse of children, young adults or any non consenting person is not what they are paid for and it defies the moral stances these people get voted in on, its criminal and it MUST be stamped out regardless of power or privilege..

Yes these people will still attempt to play their disgusting game but lets make it pretty damn difficult for them and see bodies in prison..

originally posted by: Flavian
However, it has to be said that serious questions have (again) been raised about the credibility of the key witness into these investigations. The serious questions being that the witness has previously lied under oath about abuse allegations against a seperate individual / individuals.

This keeps happening with the historic investigations. The main witnesses often turn out to be fantasists who have previously lied under oath.

My feelings on this are that the defence lawyers are paid mega money to get them

off and they use a system of finding the witness with the weakest evidence and

pull them to shreds, so if they can pull the accusation to bits and discredit one

witness .... well then all of the others must therefor be liars too.

Because the charges are so serious, it still should really be investigated, in my opinion. However, fundamental questions also need asking as to why the CPS keep charging people based on the testimonies of proven liars and fantasists. This isn't giving Janner's family a get out - if guilty i hope his memory is foever tarnished. However, if it turns out to be based on false testimony then his accuser should face charges also as it makes it harder for other abuse victims to come forward.

Well he'll never pay for his actions, but i do believe his family who are hell bent on

defending his name, KNOW that he is guilty and that will be their memory

of him FOR EVER.....tarnished.

ETA:

I know 33 victims have come forward claiming Janner abused them - they can't all be lying. My point though is that the CPS still have a key witness who isn't credible and this keeps happening in historic abuse cases.

My comment above!

ATS Gremlins

Double post.

a reply to: eletheia

With regards to Janner i probably agree with you. There are too many other victims and witnesses for their to be nothing in it.

Equally though, i completely understand the daughter wanting to protect her fathers memory. Morally, it may be wrong but it is simply what many other families do with regards to evil family members - just pick up a paper any day of the week and you will soon find something similar.

I just really struggle with historic enquiries. You want the "bad" guys to be caught but how do you know they actually are bad and it isn't vindictiveness. All the famous people being pulled in has led to a huge rise in similar claims against ordinary members of the public, often with no evidence whatsoever to back them up and from completely unreliable witnesses. Even if they subsequently get off, how do you then move forward? Mud sticks.

For example, my wife's friend has a cousin who has been accused and convicted of historic sexual abuse of another family member. The guy in question was charged by the CPS and found guilty by the jury and yet hardly anyone in the family believes a word of it, even after conviction. In fact, in court, they all stood up to tell the accuser she was full of s!*#. This has completely ruined both her life and torn her family apart. At one stage, during interviews, she told Police that she wouldn't have come forward if she had realised he faced jail time (i know, how thick is she?). Personally, i have no idea if he is guilty or not (allegedly repeatedly happened in a room with 3 people sleeping in and yet no one else can remember any of it happening). With such a paucity of evidence, how can he be found guilty? We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty but with historic abuse you are assumed guilty and have to prove your innocence - how can you do that for something that happened possibly decades before? I believe it sets a very dangerous legal precedence.

But, again, you then come back to the fact that victims need justice. Bloody difficult topic.

originally posted by: Flavian
[I just really struggle with historic enquiries. You want the "bad" guys to be caught but how do you know they actually are bad and it isn't vindictiveness. All the famous people being pulled in has led to a huge rise in similar claims against ordinary members of the public, often with no evidence whatsoever to back them up and from completely unreliable witnesses. Even if they subsequently get off, how do you then move forward? Mud sticks.

Why would a 'victim' of abuse put themselves forward to go through the trauma of

such cases? The victims more often than not wonders (regardless of innocense)

if they were to blame or brought it on themselves. Illogical yes, but true.


The perpetrator in all cases (is not some sleazy old man) but someone who has

perfected a personality and aura to every one around them of someone of integrity,

a benefactor? and the victim is aware they will not be believed because of this.


My abuser was not famous, but a family friend who behaved like the *pied piper*

giving the children treats, time and play. When I didn't want to partake, of his

extravergances. I was considered churlish. He was held in such esteem that

a) I wouldn't be believed.... b) How could I explain what I myself didn't

understand?


When the Jimmy Saville case became public, people of my mothers generation

didnt believe such things were possible, (as is perhaps in the case of Janner's family.)

It was then that I told my mother .... it had taken me 50 years! My mother wept,

and I finally felt relieved, illogically as it was I had held it against my mother for

not knowing as I felt she should have known ... she was meant to protect me

For example, my wife's friend has a cousin who has been accused and convicted of historic sexual abuse of another family member. The guy in question was charged by the CPS and found guilty by the jury and yet hardly anyone in the family believes a word of it, even after conviction. In fact, in court, they all stood up to tell the accuser she was full of s!*#.

And that is exactly what would have happened to me!

The defense of the perpetrator is that they appear to be upstanding members

of the community who would never do anything so abhorrent, therefor the

*victim* is a dirty little liar? It needs to be asked just exactly what is in it

for the *victim* to go through such an ordeal....

This has completely ruined both her life and torn her family apart. At one stage, during interviews, she told Police that she wouldn't have come forward if she had realised he faced jail time (i know, how thick is she?).

No not thick, just hurt and destroyed. wanting acknowledgement of her pain.

Often a perpetrator serves a sentence ... but the victim serves life!

Personally, i have no idea if he is guilty or not (allegedly repeatedly happened in a room with 3 people sleeping in and yet no one else can remember any of it happening). With such a paucity of evidence, how can he be found guilty?

I can relate to that ... It happens .... It happened to me.

We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty but with historic abuse you are assumed guilty and have to prove your innocence - how can you do that for something that happened possibly decades before? I believe it sets a very dangerous legal precedence.

When it is *child abuse* they dont have the knowledge to know what it is till

they are older which is perhaps the reason it becomes *historical abuse*?

But, again, you then come back to the fact that victims need justice. Bloody difficult topic.

a reply to: eletheia

Very well written. You and I know what it's like.

I was once told by a senior investigator. "The reason it's so difficult to get anything done is because the system is run by paedophiles" Though she carefully preceded that statement with, "I've been quoted in the papers as having said". She wasn't going to risk the backlash again.

I've seen a social worker three times speak about confidential information in front of the survivor and others which had the effect of crushing the survivor into silence. The system is run by paedophiles. When you try to get a case going the social workers are often unavailable because they're off on a training course. The training courses are designed by paedophiles to make the whole system rotten to the core.

When people talk about evidence what evidence do they expect to find? Nasty question but what exactly? I was told early on you have to drop any squeamishness and simply talk with scientific accuracy, if you can. Many can't and just fall silent, talk around the subject, or suddenly say it was all made up because that's the easiest way to get the pain to stop. The rigged system is literally torture, as we know.

Many who have one or two hidden childhood memories have very strong motives for calling survivors who speak up vindictive. They don't want to open their own can of worms, which is probably best for them, but it is very unfair to those seeking closure.

Children usually don't have the knowledge or language to describe what happened. A close friend witnessed the rape of a child in a sleeping bag, but he was so young at the time he didn't understand what he'd seen until two years later. It will be of interest to some ATS readers to mention the rapist in this case has been observed to have a suspiciously meaningful relationship with Charlie Veitch.

. . . he made a video called ‘Jasmine and the Morning Star’, featuring a 15 year old girl. Many of you voiced your concerns about the nature of the filming – it seemed perverted and almost paedophilic. You were right. Luckily, this girl’s mother was a bit wise to him, and accompanied the child to his flat in London, unexpected by him. He tried grooming her nevertheless, whispering to her that they had a special ‘connection’ and so on, but he could not make his sexual move in front of her mother. He had wanted her alone. He finally did get her alone, when the poor girl was only 16 years old. He got her very drunk, took her to his home, and slept with her despite her initial protests, and despite him apparently being in love with his ‘goddess’. Afterwards, the child went to the bathroom to be sick, and called a friend who luckily collected her. The story gets worse. The next day, she was very upset and told her mother. Her 40 year old mother confessed that she too, had been taken out by Charlie, and that he had also slept with her when she was too drunk to know what she was doing – just the night before he slept with her 16 year old child. Yes. I feel incredibly sick too.

He has today posted new videos that he has made with this child. The girl realises now that filming with him again was a mistake, and would like all footage of herself removed. He makes her feel uncomfortable and unsafe. She is aware of his dark, ulterior motives. It is not the first time Charlie has used children. When he was in his early 20s, he had a secret ‘relationship’ with a 14 year old schoolgirl.

Charlie was on a huge ego trip and was prepared to break young, innocent hearts along the way. He cheated with anyone he could get his hands on. He cheated on his ‘goddess’ at every festival he was stupidly given free tickets too – from ‘Sunrise’, to (ironically) ‘TruthJuice’, whilst his girlfriend was taking her university exams.

www.infiniteloveforum.com...

I have to wonder why festival organisers who have been repeatedly warned about Charlie's child rapist associate continue to welcome him.

Here's a totally random video from a totally random festival.

a reply to: eletheia

Why would a victim put themsleves through it? Some people are just compulsive fantasists. Whilst this is only a small minority, the fact that people are put for trial based on fantasists evidence makes it all the more difficult for real abuse victims to get any justice.

I certainly do not mean to diminish what happened to you (or others here). Child abuse is abhorent - no qualifiers or get outs. Ranks alongside those that abuse the disabled in my mind and the type of person that carries out such acts has absolutely no place in society - they perpetuate a cycle of misery and suffering that lasts a lifetime.

Of the case i was speaking about, the 3 people in the bed were all young (under 16). It wasn't a trusted family member, it was a sibling. The accuser already had (even at the age the "abuse" happened) a long history of fantasy and outright lying. Out of all the people that actually knew the people involved, i was one a very small band that actually thought he was guilty at the time - but, to be honest, just because their was "something about him" that didn't seem right, not because of any actual evidence. I have always felt that way about him and have never left him alone with kids at children's parties (do not know him well, just come across him a few times).

The point i am really making is that it is just so hard to do anything historically. When there is no physical evidence, it leaves the entire system open to abuse. I have absolutely no doubts that some very guilty people are currently free because they know nothing can be pinned on them. Equally though, i have no doubts that some innocent people have been convicted on the back of nothing more that vindictiveness (as some legal appeal cases have already proven).

When it is such a muddle, how do you get any conclusive answers?

a reply to: Kester

Not a fan of social workers anyway, just because of the high turnovers in staffing. How can any social worker build up any kind of rapport with a family when they are constantly being shifted all over the place? It's sad really that people go into such jobs with all the right intentions and then quickly get browbeaten into submission. My neck of England recently looked into social work staffing levels - some local (North East) social workers had 6 clients per social worker, for North Yorkshire this figure was over 90 per social worker. With numbers that high, what can realistically be achieved?

I honestly do not know what the answer is but do know that we, as a society, cannot give up.

The third person entrusted with investigating the *historic child abuse inquiry*

New Zealand Judge, Justice Lowell Goddard who had promised results in taking

on the *Establishment* in the inquiry on the historic sex abuse, has resigned.

Her salary £360,000 (is double that of the PM of the UK) She was also given

£110,000 per year for accommodation, and £12,000 for utilities, plus the use of

government cars and drivers.

The Home Office also forked out for four return flights to NZ for herself and

husband.


In her first year after taking up the post in April 2015, it was revealed she worked

44 days in her home country,Australia, plus her 30 days annual holiday, a total

of 74 days (which equates to 3 working months)

The inquiry has already spent more than a year without hearing ANY evidence


Makes *benefits frauds* look like chicken feed....

Doesn't look like the *victims* will get any sort of justice, things will drag on till no

one is left to remember.


www.mirror.co.uk...

originally posted by: Flavian
Why would a victim put themsleves through it? Some people are just compulsive fantasists. Whilst this is only a small minority, the fact that people are put for trial based on fantasists evidence makes it all the more difficult for real abuse victims to get any justice.

I have to say compulsive fantasists is not something I accept .... Liars do exist
and I think it would be fair to say I have met the best!

But child abuse would cover the ages from birth to 16 years (the age of consent
and much more aware) and it effects them all in different ways dependant on
age and the emotional stage of development they are at ....
A child of 5 yrs assimilates and deals with it very differently to a 15 yr old, but
the abuse is no less damaging.

Invariably regardless of age or personality, the first defense is to bury it, but it
wont stay burried it comes out in dreams, and the constant burying and dreaming
blurs the edges till the victim knows it happened but the 'reality' has
blurred,(so it may give the effect of lying). Most children till the age of 6/7 yrs
are not sophisticated enough to lie. Children lie out of fear.

Before the age of about 10yrs children are not sexual beings and don't know how
to deal with what a pervert does to them. Added to which they grow up with the
view that an 'adult', just by being an adult is always right you dont
argue with them!

A different approach is taken when a child reaches puberty.... they search for
approval and acceptance of their maturity, playing at being grown up - and the
perpetrator provides them with that.

So all the above and the length of time (many years) and being savaged by a
lawyer doesn't make for an excellent and concise witness?
The perpetrator knows this to his benefit especially if he has built
himself a genial persona.

Of the case i was speaking about, the 3 people in the bed were all young (under 16). It wasn't a trusted family member, it was a sibling. The accuser already had (even at the age the "abuse" happened) a long history of fantasy and outright lying.

Hmmnn..... Sounds a bit like the old chestnut, "She was dressed like a whore,
She was asking for it"??

The point i am really making is that it is just so hard to do anything historically. When there is no physical evidence, it leaves the entire system open to abuse. I have absolutely no doubts that some very guilty people are currently free because they know nothing can be pinned on them. Equally though, i have no doubts that some innocent people have been convicted on the back of nothing more that vindictiveness (as some legal appeal cases have already proven).
When it is such a muddle, how do you get any conclusive answers?

Vindictiveness is more in cases brought for seduction, force, coercion and
being taken advantage of?

'Validation' is what is required by a victim of *child abuse*

a reply to: eletheia

Here's the Goddard thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...