Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences

The obvious point to make is that he has been allowed to sit in the House of Lords and contribute to decisions affecting the future well-being of millions of UK citizens. If he can do that, why should he not also stand trial?

Om addition, with regard to these examinations on 11 separate occasions: Were Lord Janner and his carers given prior notice of these meetings?

Lord Janner has been formally found unfit to stand trial regarding a string of historical sexual offences at a hearing at the Old Bailey.

The peer and former Labour MP is suffering from Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia, which is incurable, severe and has left him unable to participate in a trial, four experts who have examined him have agreed.

The decision on Monday means that there will not be a full criminal trial to hear the claims against Janner, which span three decades.

Instead, he is expected to face a “trial of the facts”, where the jury is asked to decide – on the basis of evidence adduced by prosecution lawyers and by lawyers who put the case for the defence – whether or not the accused did the acts he or she was charged with.

Judge Peter Openshaw, presiding, said he had taken the unusual decision to release details of the medical assessments on Janner’s condition following “scepticism” over his ability to appear before the court.

Due to severe dementia, Janner can no longer recognise his children and grandchildren; cannot speak, write or watch television; and is reliant upon a carer for his safety and personal hygiene, the court heard. Four eminent clinicians examined Janner on 11 separate occasions, the court heard.

Source: Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences | UK news | The Guardian

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


11 thoughts on “Lord Janner found unfit to stand trial for alleged sex offences

  1. gusman

    Surprise surprise. If you want to know how hierarchical power works in this country, you look at the massive VIP/MP peado network, and who can and can’tt be thrown to the wolves.

  2. NMac

    I would be interested to know when was the last time Janner sat in the House of Lords and how much he has been claiming in expenses. If he is able to do these things, then he is fit to stand trial.

  3. Jonathan Wilson

    To be fair, Dementia/alzheimer is a progressive illness. He could have been fairly compos mentis while he was still turning up at the lords (which was a while ago now) and now be away with the fairies.

    My mum has it, early on-set when she was 55 – a few years back, undiagnosed at the time – and most days would be seemingly fine, if a little “hair brained” and forgetful. In the last year or so, she can no longer remember much and what she can is all jumbled up (its scary just how quickly it progresses once a tipping point is reached). Rather oddly on the very very rare days she can concentrate enough to read a book for brief periods she can still read Latin but now mostly spends her time unable to communicate, staring off into the middle distance and having to be manually fed.

    All that said. He should be tried “in absentia” as he himself has previously argued should be the case where the defendant is unable to defend themselves for historical crimes due to mental acuity. But then again I’m also a strong believer of the HRA and the right to a fair trial and this type of case is different to one where the person is absent through absconding or outside of jurisdiction where the person has deliberately removed their own ability to contest a case against them.

    I guess the best that can be done is to, as is being argued, try the facts of the matter.. but I would like (but don’t think its possible) if the findings are against him then there should be a sentence imposed that limits his freedoms should he “recover”, which would prevent abuse _if_ he is faking it.

  4. Dez

    Hmmmm. Four expensive top clinicians would not all want to ruin their reputations for the sake of some fee work……protecting someone with the shameful acts that have alleged to have been committed…… Sounds like defence really went OTT to make their medically unfit point beyond reasonable doubt.

  5. Jeffery Davies

    There endeth the lesson screw the electorate by sitting at the lords and up yours with standing trial hmm mrs davies little boy is surring from this but niws right from wrong

  6. roybeiley

    Get him examined by IDS’s people. They think Altzheimers is curable. Give him some tablets, stop his allowances and have him re-examined in 3 months.

  7. Rick B (@TenPercent)

    Interesting a known paedophile, because they are powerful, gets better quality medical assessments than millions of disabled people who who have their impairments denied and benefits cut. Abuse comes in many forms…

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      He’s only an alleged paedophile – that’s the whole point. He’s evading the charges against him.

  8. openlinesuk

    There should be some urgency in taking matters to court … Lord Janner’s case has dragged on for years. Too many get off due to being dead or dying… it is an outrage. If Chilcot were out already and Blair brought to book for lying in parliament it might have stopped Corbyn in his tracks. Delays cost lives and have real implications. We need action with some sense of immediacy!

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      You mean, if Chilcot were out already… it might have stopped CAMERON in his tracks, don’t you?

  9. Tim

    Come on. If every peer was disallowed from attending the House of Lords for being mentally unfit the place would become near empty! Anybody who is a peer can attend the chamber, sign-in and receive a payment of a few hundred pounds whether they participate or not be they super-sane geniuses or barking mad loons. Peers are not answerable to anybody, least of all to the electorate of the country. People put on trial are. What point is there in trying an empty husk like Janner even if he plonks his arse on a bench in the upper chamber?

Comments are closed.