Sir Jim...again!

[TonyR]

Yet he's perfectly able to vote (in person) on matters of national importance less than a year ago.

I suspect he was able but not perfectly able. He was diagnosed with Alzheimers six years ago and according to the CPS needs round the clock care now for a disease in its advanced stage. Perhaps you've never experienced someone with advanced Alzheimers and you might pay a visit to the local care home to find out exactly what it means.

[DaveP]

Yet he's perfectly able to vote (in person) on matters of national importance less than a year ago.

As far as I can make out, being "awa' wi' the fairies" has never been seen as much of a problem in politics

But I do agree that it would be easy to make out a case for showing the public how afflicted a person in these circumstances actually is. It is all too easy to hide behind a diagnosis of this sort. Unfortunately this takes us into Catch 22 territory. If he's not fit to stand trial - he's not competent to agree to surrender any of his privacy. We'll just have to take the experts word for it...

However. The real dirt in this case was created in 2007 when, it appears, matters pertaining were hushed up.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-le ... e-32360661

[merseymouth]

Hi there, I think most people appreciate the reasons why a trial cannot be held over Greville Janner's alleged crimes, but feel frustrated? But for far, far too long many of his ilk have been protected from being held to account for their distasteful & depraved practices by similarly corrupt individuals!
These coteries go way back, always protected by powerful friends & allies, so those abused & misused never get believed. The law will always be protective of those with the funds to buy influence.
Remember the Daily Mirror paying a large wodge of cash to Lord Boothby for Libel? The owner of the paper suppress the truth even though the had irrefutable evidence to support their claims! Not nice.
Only when a "Man of straw" with time on his/her hands can compete against a monied opponent, think McDonalds, we need more such heroes!
I feel sorry for the poor humble bobby who was bullied into covering up for Saville, Smith et al, they deserved better from their superiors. MM

[JohnW]

............There was something about a Westminster child sex ring a couple of months back,it's all gone quiet though

...........well it would, wouldn't it?

[RogerThat]

Establishment cover ups are clearly alive and well. If this was anyone else he'd be standing in the dock. The list of over 25 victims currently pursuing goes back to 1977. Quite a career...

[reohn2]

Yet he's perfectly able to vote (in person) on matters of national importance less than a year ago.

I suspect he was able but not perfectly able. He was diagnosed with Alzheimers six years ago and according to the CPS needs round the clock care now for a disease in its advanced stage. Perhaps you've never experienced someone with advanced Alzheimers and you might pay a visit to the local care home to find out exactly what it means.

A brain scan(which can't be faked) will clear up any doubt as to whether our right honourable friend is afflicted with this disease or not,you'd think that would be the next logical step.
We awaite any further news.

[TonyR]

Establishment cover ups are clearly alive and well. If this was anyone else he'd be standing in the dock. The list of over 25 victims currently pursuing goes back to 1977. Quite a career...

Very unlikely that anyone with advanced Alzheimers would be standing in the dock. And even if they were, as noted above, the judge would have to halt the trial.

I am uncomfortable with the volume of accusers so must be guilty until proved innocent approach that is currently being taken in the absence of any hard evidence and the inability to even check most of it. Which of us can say where we were, what we were doing and prove it for a day 30 years ago?

We need to bear in mind that what has been called the worst miscarriage of justice in the UK - the Stephen Kisko case - started with four girls making uncorroborated accusations and perjuring themselves for what they later admitted was "a bit of fun".

Its compounded by the police approach of naming the suspect to advertise for people to come forward. You only need to look at the recent twittersphere treatment of Sue Perkins, Stella Creasy and Oisin Tymon to realise there are some seriously nasty people out there who are willing to make all sorts of threats and allegations against innocent people.

[TonyR]

A brain scan(which can't be faked) will clear up any doubt as to whether our right honourable friend is afflicted with this disease or not,you'd think that would be the next logical step.

I doubt it. Even if it came back positive, those who want to believe will just proclaim the result another establishment cover up as they have with the current CPS statements.

[RogerThat]

Couldn't agree less. It's 'one law for the rich and famous' attitudes like this which allowed Saville to perpetrate such heinous crimes for over 60 years, with complete impunity. Clearly the has been a long term tolerance at the highest levels of government for 'unusual behavior'. But not taking every available opportunity to pursue these animals in a court of law we are denying every single victim. Let's remember it's them who have suffered, and continue to suffer, not Lord Janner. I've had to assess people accused of crimes for suitability to stand, and on only one occasion have I decided not to see them in court.

Like I said previously, most prisons have medical wings where the elderly and enfeebled can see out their days. They are mostly composed of those whose crimes are similar to the alleged crimes of Janner. There's almost no doubting now that a political sex ring was ongoing previous to 2000. And almost no doubt that politicians of all colors turned a blind eye to it, and made sure the authorities and the secret service did so too. It's no conspiracy theory, it's a solid fact.

These people, imo are equally as guilty as they perpetrators themselves and I would like to see more evidence of their guilt being pursued by the police.

[RogerThat]

Yet he's perfectly able to vote (in person) on matters of national importance less than a year ago.

I suspect he was able but not perfectly able. He was diagnosed with Alzheimers six years ago and according to the CPS needs round the clock care now for a disease in its advanced stage. Perhaps you've never experienced someone with advanced Alzheimers and you might pay a visit to the local care home to find out exactly what it means.

He was able to drive himself there and back, have chats in the bar and vote on matters of state security. Imo his claim to severe Alzheimer's is a complete fiction. It may be present, but the majority of people can function quite well with low/medium states of the disease. Certainly well enough to sit in court, say their name and understand the charges put to them.

[Psamathe]

I think there are two aspects emerging from the discussion:
1. Does the individual suffer from dementia to the point where he cannot stand trial ?
As I understand it 4 consultants have examined him and found that he is unfit to stand trial (or whatever the expression is), two appointed by the family and two appointed by the CPS. Personally I would find it difficult to argue that they are wrong (given that they are experts and have examined the individual and I suspect most people claiming he's faking it are not experts and have not examined him. I can only rely on the diagnosis of these experts, but I can say that I have personally been shocked at how fast dementia can progress; it seems that (some) sufferers cope with a fair amount but suddenly a slight progression means routine tasks become just too much and everything seems to fall apart.

2. Should he stand trial and if found guilty be punished anyway.
That would seem to be a matter of law. From what I've read, were a trial to happen and were he found guilty the courts would realistically have only one sentencing option "absolute discharge". An interesting excerpt from a legal blog on the issue

Any prosecution would be an expensive and time consuming process and it could not prove Janner’s guilt, or require the Court to punish him. The inevitable result would be either his acquittal or (far more likely given his inability to contest the evidence) a finding that he had committed the acts alleged, followed by his absolute discharge. What is more – although Ms Saunders did not say this – the trial of a man unable to defend himself while a succession of witnesses made a series of unchallengeable allegations against him would be a fairly grotesque parody of justice.

(I found the full article interesting because it did not seem to be arguing that Janner should or should not be prosecuted, but rather it discusses the legal considerations.)

Personally, as to how this should progress in the world according to me ... I really don't know. I can see strong arguments for both sides.

Ian

[DaveP]

I can say that I have personally been shocked at how fast dementia can progress;

+1
It really can progress rapidly.

[reohn2]

A brain scan(which can't be faked) will clear up any doubt as to whether our right honourable friend is afflicted with this disease or not,you'd think that would be the next logical step.

I doubt it. Even if it came back positive, those who want to believe will just proclaim the result another establishment cover up as they have with the current CPS statements.

I can't see that if a scan showed either way,there can be any doubt.

[TonyR]

A brain scan(which can't be faked) will clear up any doubt as to whether our right honourable friend is afflicted with this disease or not,you'd think that would be the next logical step.

I doubt it. Even if it came back positive, those who want to believe will just proclaim the result another establishment cover up as they have with the current CPS statements.

I can't see that if a scan showed either way,there can be any doubt.

If its the conspiracy theory that some people believe then how do you know its a scan of his brain and how do you know the diagnosis is correct? The scan of an Alzheimer's patient could always be substituted and short of the unethical step of putting his personal medical information on the web so everyone can be their own expert diagnostician, would the sceptics believe any statements made about them?

[reohn2]

If its the conspiracy theory that some people believe then how do you know its a scan of his brain and how do you know the diagnosis is correct? The scan of an Alzheimer's patient could always be substituted and short of the unethical step of putting his personal medical information on the web so everyone can be their own expert diagnostician, would the sceptics believe any statements made about them?

Some people believe the moon's made of green cheese
Some people have been caught out before:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Saunders
A scan performed under controlled conditions would prove definitely whether he has the illness or not.