The Spectator's Notes

Charles Moore’s Notes: Are we really going to try Lord Janner’s corpse?

9 January 2016

9:00 AM

9 January 2016

9:00 AM

At the end of next week, a judge will decide whether the ‘trial of the facts’ can proceed now that its subject, Lord Janner, is dead. Janner was accused, on various occasions, of child abuse, though the Crown Prosecution Service, on three occasions, over more than 20 years, decided that there was no case to prosecute. The amazing Simon Danczuk, now himself accused of rape, used parliamentary privilege to accuse Janner of the same crime (plus torture). Last year, Janner was forced to appear in court, though senile. When his senility was upheld, his accusers resorted to a trial of the facts to get their day in court. They were pursuing this aim when Janner died last month. This procedure exists under the Insanity Act. Its use is when criminal proceedings are brought against a person who lacks mental capacity: it is an interim process designed to preserve the safety of the public unless and until the person accused recovers. The trial of the facts can only have one of three possible outcomes — a hospital order, a probation order, or absolute discharge. In other words, it has a purpose only when the accused person is alive. Yet such is the spirit of the times that the terrified CPS has equivocated on the issue. It must give a view, however, to the judge. If Mr Justice Openshaw decides that the trial of the facts can go ahead, we shall have reverted to a benighted situation, not known for a thousand years, in which the criminal law tries the dead. I can see that this will create exciting new work for lawyers — let’s try Jimmy Savile, the Emperor Tiberius, Adolf Hitler for bombing Coventry! — but it would also be mad and bad.

A dead person who has, in effect, been tried — though without any defence being provided — is George Bell, Bishop of Chichester, who died in 1958. His former diocese announced last autumn that he had abused a child more than 60 years ago, though no evidence has been revealed. It has settled with Bell’s anonymous accuser, paying money. I wrote about this injustice in last Saturday’s Daily Telegraph. In Tuesday’s paper, the present bishop, Martin Warner, wrote a courteous letter in which he recognised the shock of the accusation against Bell (one of the most distinguished bishops in Anglican history), but complained that I gave ‘little space or acknowledgment’ to the ‘perspective’ of the ‘survivor’. The anguish of an abused person is indeed a terrible thing, but how can I, or anyone, acknowledge that perspective in this case when the point at issue is the facts? Why should we take it from the Diocese of Chichester that she/he is a survivor? It was wrong before in not pursuing real abusers: why will it automatically be right now when claiming to have identified one? The Church, of all institutions, should understand what the presumption of innocence means.

One of the things that worries me about a vote to leave the European Union (which I should like to cast) is that it might cause Scotland to vote to leave the United Kingdom. There’s not much point in ‘getting our country back’ if we then lose it, although I suppose English nationalists would not agree with my definition of ‘our country’. But the SNP threat needs thinking round carefully. First, a threat is not a fact. Second, it cannot be right to disaggregate the United Kingdom vote in a United Kingdom referendum. It will certainly be interesting to find out how Scots voted, but if they vote differently from England, this will not invalidate the overall result. The same applies the other way round: if Scottish ‘Stay’ voters swing the balance their way, English ‘Leave’ voters should not complain that the result is illegitimate. Third, what would Scotland’s fate actually be if it joined the EU after ‘rUK’ left? Scottish Nationalists presuppose that free movement of Scottish trade, money and people to England would be permitted in all circumstances. Would the Scots vote to leave the UK when confronted with the idea that this might not be so?

Our country neighbour, Edward Cazalet, is a retired judge and bold horseman. He is also the literary heir of P.G. Wodehouse because his grandmother was Wodehouse’s wife. He has produced a merry book of speeches, comic equine verse, and reflections (Seen From The Wings, Shaw Farm Editions). I love his interpolations about and quotations from ‘Plum’. He notes Wodehouse’s conservatism about art and informs us that his favourite painting, which hung over his desk, was a quite dull-looking oil of the Mansion House in the late 18th century. What he liked most in it were three cattle being herded by a dog as they make their way through the carriages in the thoroughfare. It reminded him of his brief time working in the City for the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank about 100 years later. Edward also tells us about the difficulties of rendering Wodehouse in French. Where the original says: ‘He [Cyril Bassington-Bassington, calling on Bertie Wooster at 7.45 a.m.] was given the raspberry by Jeeves and told to try again about three hours later’, the French translation says: ‘Jeeves lui donna respectueusement un jus de framboise et lui dit de revenir à peu près trois heures plus tard.

Being a rider myself, I sometimes worry about breaking my neck or back. In November, a friend of friends, George Kershaw, suffered this fate in a crashing fall. He is now a quadraplegic, lying in hospital, and waiting to see if he will recover any sensation in his limbs (there are faint — but only faint — good signs). He is writing (or rather, dictating) a most inspiring blog from his hospital bed. One of his comforts is Siri, a voice-activated means of texting and googling on his iPhone. He asked Google ‘Can quadraplegics have sex?’, but Siri somehow misunderstood him and told him ‘I am putting you through to the Stevenage Escort Service’: ‘Unfortunately I did not know the voice command for Disconnect. Tricky conversation.’ Anyone wanting to follow George Kershaw’s struggle can follow the link The escort service sent him a charming Christmas card.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments
  • The Laughing Cavalier

    There should be a finding of facts in the case of Janner, his victims deserve at least that.

    • Terry Field

      There can be no such thing, with the defendant absent . It is applying civil balance of probability to criminal actions, the test required being ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
      You SHOULD have said
      ‘The ALLEGED victims’

    • Tamerlane

      There aren’t any victims by definition. That’s the point.

      • The Laughing Cavalier

        Try telling that to the men who were buggered by him when they were
        little boys. You can call them “alleged” victims if it satisfies your pedantry. A fact-finding enquiry is not a trial.

        • Tamerlane


        • Mr B J Mann

          Why should we waste public momey on a fact finding enquiry when you appear to already know all the facts?!

          Wouldn’t it be more fruitful to have a enquiry into the Establishment cover up of Alien Abduction where the facts aren’t as well established and the victims have suffered far worse trauma?!?!!!

          • The Laughing Cavalier

            False analogy and an absurd one at that. I don’t know all the facts,though I do believe the allegations against him which is why there should be an Inquiry if for no other reason than for the sake of his victims (you can call them alleged if you like)

          • Mr B J Mann

            You don’t know all the facts!

            But you know enough of them to know he’s guilty?!

            And you call what I say absurd?!?!?!!!!

  • Bodkinn

    You can be sure that all the low life lawyers and the odious organizations that often work under emotive titles will not allow the dead to rest in peace if there is any chance of money being made by their continued presence. If you are one of those who suddenly discover after many decades that your life was ruined because some older man put his hand down your trousers you and those legal friends who promote your deferred suffering would rather get the answers they want from a cadaver.

  • eoanthropus

    Why not? It’s been done with Jimmy Saville.

    • siphil

      Except that it hasn’t. Savile has not been tried in an actual court of law, has he?

      • Terry Field

        That is the point; this juvenile, silent modern society would like nothing more than lynching. Why not put a few on that foul emission ‘East Enders’??????
        Just the ticket for the man violent ignorant, self-indulgent, really quite disgusting proletariat.

      • eoanthropus

        Simple. Dig up his body, Throw it in the Thames and watch to see if it floats or not. Either way he’s guilty.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Did you know that 50% of people that are given an anaesthetic, eg for surgery, experience hallucinations on coming round that they can’t distinguish from reality?

          And that in half of those the hallucinations are of a s-xual nature?!

          Now, where did Savile, spend most of his time?

          And on what kind of wards?!

  • Terry Field

    We could quarter him and impale the parts on Westminster bridge; the country has a long history of inhuman barbarism, so why not reintroduce this for the delectation of the hordes of prole trash that constitute such a large proportion of the ‘Great British Public’ (yuk)
    Who needs habeas corpus – lets have quarterthecorpus!!!
    Much more fun.

    • MikeF

      Curiously I was thinking of the last time I am aware of that a dead person was posthumously ‘punished’ in this country. That would be Oliver Cromwell whose remains were disinterred from Westminster Abbey after the Restoration and beheaded at Tyburn before his head was stuck on a spike and displayed until it fell off in a storm. As for Greville Janner he is no longer alive and so there is no point in any formal legal procedure to investigate the allegations against him. Whether possible proceeding against him were deliberately frustrated in a ‘cover-up’ is another matter.

      • Terry Field

        I suggest the following:

        A Royal Commission on the Police be set up, charged with opening every single file held in every single force, that concerns itself with the following:
        1 Rape and sexual abuse suggested, possible, possible / rejected, not prosecuted for ANY reason. NO exclusions.
        All files of the CPS to be opened, at the same time, and looked at by the rOyal Commission, to review propriety between agencies
        To cover all types, to all persons in any pat of British jurisdiction, with no backward time-limit.
        2 ALL files covering suspected sexual abuse by – specifically – muslims -(justified by the notorious cases) – to cover ALL police files in EVERY TOWN AND CITY; this to include all information on relations between political parties in power when the abuse is alleged to have happened. These files to include ALL claims of abuse by children in care, or otherwise living, and ALL notes from ALL social workers and other relevant professionals plus ALL information concerning the relationship between those agencies, and all agency individuals relevant to each and every specific alleged abuse case, and any and all political parties or their elected representatives, to concentrate on links between politicians and local events and authorities.


        THEN we can put Janner into context – is he part of a diversionary tactic???
        Perish the thought. (Ditto for poor Leon)

        ALL the information exists; it is in police files. They know where the bodies are buried in respect of the power elites both past and present. Hence the need for a foreign chair, and a foreign investigative power to look at the police files.

        What a state of affairs for a country to have descended to.

        • JabbaPapa

          You’re actually serious …

          What you’re proposing is a witch hunt, and the abandonment of presumption of innocence.

        • davidshort10

          The police routinely beat up people in the past. I wouldn’t mind them being called to account. Some of them even joined the force for the opportunity.

      • outlawState

        “There is no point in any formal legal procedure to investigate the allegations against him.”

        I think that is untrue. There are many defendants who will want to be claiming compensation for alleged crimes committed by him against them.

        • JabbaPapa

          And WHO will provide that compensation ? Who will be guilty by mere association, despite not having actually committed any of these alleged crimes ?

          • davidshort10

            On Sunday morning, the 10 January, the Prime Minister talked about ‘government money’, so there you have it. It represents funds that Mrs Thatcher said did not exist when she was PM……Now it is there for all of us to feed upon….

  • ForgottenAustralianFamily

    You assume that because the police investigated and found no case to answer, that it didn’t happen. In another comment, someone remarks on a survivor suddenly discovering after decades that an older man molested them. My complaint has been dismissed four times over a period of 20 years. The reason given by the police is the public esteem in which my abuser is held. Two deathbed disclosures (one about another victim, and the other about the molestation my abuser himself suffered as a child) are all I have to convince me that I’m not crazy, and that it’s worth going on. And for the benefit of those who think “alleged victims” are simply after money, the outcome of my abuse by “an older man” was a lifetime of misery after I married another abuser in the confused aftermath of what happened. It was not possible to escape either the original abuse or the marriage, for reasons not easy to explain here. But I hope someone reading this will understand that most victims do not pursue complaints, against living OR dead perpetrators, for frivolous purposes. I’ve known many other victims of childhood abuse, and have never met one who was using the system in the cynical fashion implied in some of these comments. People don’t suddenly decide they were abused. Most of the time it is an uncomfortably buried memory. Bringing it to the attention of the authorities is one way to begin healing. I have yet to discover what that feels like, as the police here are too intimidated by my abuser’s elite connections, which include leading members of the Queensland judiciary,

    • JM McGill

      “You assume that because the police investigated and found no case to answer, that it didn’t happen”.

      Yes, that is what the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof means. It may be imperfect but without it we are back to witch trials and barbarism.

    • JabbaPapa

      All of this might be true, but let’s say the trial against Jenner proceeds, and the dead man is found guilty — who then will be paying the damages awarded ? Who will be guilty by association and be liable for penalties ? His family ?

  • davidshort10

    I find the section on Scotland confusing. If the UK leaves then surely Scotland also leaves. Scotland can only re-join if it then becomes a separate nation, and even then it would take some time. If the UK leaves the EU, I would imagine it is highly unlikely that Scotland would then vote in any subsequent referendum to leave the UK. If it did, it would be out of the UK and out of the EU. Despite having some Scottish blood, I would very much enjoy seeing Scotland in this position, if only to punish the SNP which has created a lot of bad blood between the two nations. And is it too much to hope for that Andrew ‘Brillo Pad’ Neill would be forced to show his passport and perhaps even apply for a visa? Some Scottish imports, such as whisky and the Sunday Post, are welcome. Others are most assuredly not.

    • siphil

      It appears the SNP are of the view that if the UK collectively votes to leave and Scotland individually votes to stay, then they can somehow disassemble the vote and demand another independence referendum as the leave vote is not binding on Scotland. I say that idea is barking mad.

      • davidshort10

        Scotland has changed from the country it was when I was a child. It volunteered to join the UK when it was broke and I would welcome it leaving voluntarily also.

        • mitchyboy

          It did not. a bunch of aristocrats were bribed by Queen Anne with thousands. The public rioted all over Scotland at our country being given away.

          • davidshort10

            I didn’t know that. Let us repair the damage and make it an independent country once more.

    • MichtyMe

      ‘Brillo Pad’ having been born in the UK would have the right to UK citizenship, as would any offspring he might produce, so a visa application would be unnecessary. Scots independence would permit him, if he so wished, to have duel citizenship, something which the UK allows for all nations of the world. If London is unwilling or unable to remove UK citizenship from a few dangerous jihadi it’s improbable it would try confiscate 5 millions passports even if they knew where to find them.

      • davidshort10

        I would be happy for Brillo Pad to have a ‘duel’ and lose.

      • davidshort10

        We don’t need to confiscate them. We can just null them electronically.

        • MichtyMe

          Hmmm, I didn’t know the Home Office had a list of all citizens with the “Scots” flagged up with an S.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I think you will find they have records of place of birth.

            Ditto parents.

    • Border Guy Scot

      Modern Politics and the stance taken by ourselves in Scotland, deplore how we are being represented but hey ho. who`d be so negative.The EU debate see the worst coming out in some parts of the UK with self interest and attitudes that are reminiscent in history of the USA`s Isolationist policies. International economies are so interwoven, that coming out isn`t going to help us that much, what seems to be causing the problem is the fact that many areas of the UK just haven`t accepted that we are part of Europe.

      • davidshort10

        Many of us do not wish to be ‘part of Europe’ even though geographically we are. The UK is a democratic nation and many of us do not wish to be part of an unelected bureaucracy that also conspires as a trade barrier organisation against poorer parts of the world.

        • Border Guy Scot

          Yes and I would like to be part of a country and have a government that didn`t take us into an apparent illegal war, with no plans, or launch into imperialist interventions in countries that cause chaos, increase the terrorist threat, then demand I pay extra taxes to maintain the Trident system. Only by working with our neighbours, collectively can we progress not isolationism.

          • davidshort10

            Erm, isolationism means not getting into dumb, illegal wars. I think you would be happy to be part of a nation, Scotland. I would welcome an independent Scotland. And I would welcome the rest of the country, preferably just England and Wales, to be independent too. Northern Ireland can be part of the Republic of Ireland. We can move Trident to Portsmouth.

          • davidshort10

            How lovely it would be not to have those SNP MPs in Westminster. They don’t want to be part of the UK but they sit in its parliament.

          • Mr B J Mann

            I think you’ll find it’s the EU that was behind everything from the violent and illegal breakup of Yugosavia, through to the disasters in the Ukrain and Libya!

          • Blair the war criminal is a Scotsman.

          • Border Guy Scot

            Well Jack, and he was supported by everyone in Westminster, especially by the Tories, and only opposed by the SNP and some Labour MPs. Says a lot for the old imperialists who haven`t disappeared. Some are saying the BNP has only disbanded because they are now all in the Tories.

        • davidshort10

          We are in agreement. i want Scotland to be an independent country and if the rest of the population had had the vote in the referendum you guys would be well on the way to independence now and we’d be building the border defences.

          • JabbaPapa

            Scotland shmotland — let Oxford University vote on whether it wishes to declare itself an independent State !!!

            Let Mrs Smith down the road conduct a poll to declare the independence of her back garden !!!

            If this is the end result of the abolishment of feudalism, then the Commons should be disbanded as a gang of traitors to the Crown.

      • Freddythreepwood

        Happy to be part of Europe. Unhappy to be part of the European Union. Simple enough.

  • pobjoy

    Are we really going to try Józef Wesołowski’s corpse?

  • Thanks Tank

    This site had a convicted child abuser writing against the exposition of child abuse by politicians.

    I know there is loyalty to the party and establishment but come on people.

  • mikewaller

    I am sure that it is no more than a statistical fluke, but strangely Moore’s Olympian judgements seem routinely to favour the rich and/or powerful. Thus, without regard to the merits of any given case, our hero here favours protecting the reputations of dead members of the Establishment over the possibility of bringing some kind of closure to those who may have been their victims. Provided the same standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” is applied, I see no reason at all why such cases should not be considered. The alternative is to make double victims of those wronged by first robbing them of their innocence and then any possibility of justice.That may be OK by ersatz patrician, Moore, but it most certainly in not by me.

    Indeed, I would take things much further. Go into St Paul’s Cathedral and you will see a plaque put up by his widow to commemorate Sir John Franklin’s supposed discovery of the North West Passage. In fact, he did nothing of the sort. Then, when John Rae, the greatest polar explorer of his age and the guy who came as close as was then possible to doing so, found solid evidence that members of Franklin’s crew had resorted to cannibalism in an understandable but vain attempt to survive, the redoubtable Lady F used all her Establishment contacts to have Rae roundly rubbished. Contra Moore, I cannot help but think that having an explanatory note affixed to the wall near the existing plaque would be a wonderful way of making clear to powerful miscreants that even death provides no hiding place. Such a threat might even make them behave better.

    • Mr B J Mann

      I’m poor and powerless and of no repute.

      I’m sure that’s why they kept taking me from my bed on the children’s psychiatric ward and doing unspeakable things to me.

      And for its own nefarious reasons the Establishment wants to cover it up.

      Where do I go for my compo?

      You wouldn’t believe the harm that is done to people when they are pulled into a UFO by tractor beams and subjected to experiments by aliens!!!

      • mikewaller

        Always remember, the fact that you world view is wholly one-eyed does not mean that all human’s suffer from the same misfortune. Each case deserves to be judged on its own merits.Some claimants will be self-serving crooks, others genuine victims whose lives have been wrecked by the base desires of others. Only the damnedest kind of fool thinks that one size fits all. Death of the alleged perpetrator is not of itself good enough reason for not seeking to establish the truth.The usual judicial tests need to be applied. Certainly, the right to face one’s accusers when one is alive is a very important protection; but when dead, that alone should not preclude further enquiries. If it allowed to, the wonderful maxim “be you never so great the Law is above you” has to ordinary folk a very hollow wring.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Are you calling me a One-Eyed Alien?

          Or a One-Eyed B-B-B….rown?!

          Having said that, I have re-read your earlier post which I had earlierskimmed on a tiny phone screen and I now note you refer to:

          “…..the possibility of bringing some kind of closure to those who *may* have been
          their victims. *Provided* the same standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” is applied….”

          Apologies, I suspect I might have mistaken you for another poster who had already decided the suspects’ guilt and the claimants’ victimhood!

  • Smedley Butler

    I’m not much of a Bible thumper but vaguely remember something about the dead burying the dead. On a similar vein we should appoint dead policemen to investigate, dead lawyers to prosecute and a suitably distinguished but deceased judge to try the case. As in any free country the accused can choose his own defence. It’s unlikely that any requests for costs will come from the hereafter but in the even they do payment should be made by chequer afterwards cremated.

  • cdvision

    Its important the facts are assessed. If the alleged crimes are established beyond reasonable doubt, then next should be established who covered for Janner over many years, and why the CPS failed to prosecute.

    Its not so much a case of pursuing Janner beyond the grave, more a case of finding other guilty parties and making sure this sort of cover-up (if one is established) can’t happen again.

    • The Elderking

      I think you have nailed it.

      Establish what happened, clear the air and pursue anyone who was complicit.

    • Mr B J Mann

      So you’re calling for an enquiry into the events and people surrounding janner, not a trial of Jnner’s corpse, then?!

  • Ed  

    I’ve always found the French custom of trials in absentia faintly distasteful, and this is reminiscent of that.

    • JabbaPapa

      Anyone found guilty in absentia by a French Court is automatically entitled to a new trial if apprehended or presenting themself at a later date — and such trials can of course produce a “not guilty” verdict.

      To accuse the deceased is somewhat different.

      • Gilbert White

        You cannot conceptualise, sorry do you mean like what they did to Hitler, before and after his suicide?

        • JabbaPapa

          who “they” ? what is “what” ?

          Hitler has never been tried by a French Court, so frankly I haven’t a clue what you’re on about.

  • Gilbert White

    Yes just like wot they did to the disgusting Savile corpse. Janner’s filthy apologetic family should be investigated as well for their role?

    • Mr B J Mann

      When I wer a lad there wer a creepy ol couple down t’road that used to kidnap kids who weren’t home before dark and feed them into their sausage machine in the basement.

      Every kid in the area knew about them.

      And on still dark nights, if you listened very, very, very carefully, you could just about make out the clanking of the machinery and the wails of the victims.

      I told my parents about it, and I’m sure every other child did too, so they must have told the police, who clearly took no action, so must have been in on it.

      And to cap it all it was in the Heart of Ripper Country and just down t’road from Savile’s pad.

      Clearly there was a Sado-Paedo gang at work protected by the authorities.

      Who should I report it to?

      And will there be any compo for PTSD?!

  • alfredo

    I have now read the ‘reply’ of the Bishop of Chichester to Mr Moore’s article on the post mortem treatment of Bishop George Bell. It is difficult to comment on this concatenation of woolly non sequiturs because it is incoherent, fails to answer any of Moore’s points, and makes no sense at all. It is bad enough that the memory of this great and good man has been traduced by the Church by a process which is reminiscent of the Dark Ages or the Soviet Union. It is much worse to discover that he was condemned by those whose thought processes appear to be on the level of the feeble-minded.
    ‘Dr’ Warner claims to be upholding some area of the Christian faith. I wonder if he had in mind the injunction not to bear false witness against your neighbour. It’s a pity that the OT lawgiver didn’t add ‘particularly when he’s dead and can’t defend himself and when you have absolutely no means of knowing whether it’s false or not’.

  • Suriani

    The British state is reverting to historical type, the fiefdom of the overwhelmingly English or anglicized ‘establishment’. The Scots would be chumps and dupes to continue an also ran constitutional relationship that no red blooded Englishman would tolerate for an instant. Were the English part of the UK to vote to quit the EU by sufficient numbers to swing the vote and the Scots vote to stay, that would simply reinforce the case for adieu. Feelings of Schadenfreude in Brussels cannot be ruled out, to Scotland’s advantage of course.

  • Freddythreepwood

    I think Wodehouse was well aware of the difficulty in translating his unique prose into French:

    “Into the face of the young man who sat on the terrace of the Hotel Magnifique at Cannes there had crept a look of furtive shame, the shifty hangdog look which announces that an Englishman is about to speak French.”
    The Luck of the Bodkins.

  • uberwest

    The trial should go ahead, if only to bring out into the open the evidence against Janner and the testimony of his alleged victims. If this evidence and testimony is overwhelmingly against Janner, then it will turn into a trial of the justice system, the CPS and all the other bodies who obstructed justice when Janner was alive.

  • Clavers

    The concept of the trial of a dead person is grotesque.

  • Mr B J Mann

    I told you I was ill!

  • Oddsbods

    Well they did prevent and postpone any trial until they were sure he was dead, so there must be some purpose in it?

  • MikePage

    “Innocent until proven guilty” makes this perspective understandable, but it is not the only perspective.

    Justice is a two-way street.

    Even if Janner – being dead – cannot be proven guilty, that does not prove innocence either.

    Or do the dead actually have rights??

  • John M

    The persecution of this trial is a sad reflection on the morality and grubby money grabbing practices of some people in the legal profession. For they know that not only will they be paid to pursue a trial of facts, but also that if successful they can attempt another payday via a case for civil damages against the estate left to his family.

    It’s all about the money, money, money. Same with the lowlives who are so aggressive launching lawsuits against members of the armed services alleging “war crimes”. Those Bentleys don’t come for free baby.

  • MrJones

    If the trial of the facts comes out as expected then the victims of this Westminster cover up – including all the ones who wouldn’t have been victims if he’d been stopped earlier – will get some kind of belated justice.

    And if so then Westminster will have been shown to have covered it up for decades – that’s why they don’t want a trial.

    Smith, Janner, Morrison, Brittan – the political class don’t want to have to answer how come?

  • MrJones

    “Protect the children of the poor and punish the wrongdoer.”
    Old Bailey

  • MrJones

    Westminster gets away with it yet again.