Cyril Smith - the revellations
Discussion
http://order-order.com/2015/04/16/lord-janner-call...
So mote it be.
Of the people accused on these "conspiracy" sites - who is next do we think?
If it carries on like this I could end up voting for David Icke!!!
carinaman said:
onyx39 said:
Thorodin said:
Just heard the victims' support group is planning a legal challenge to the CPS' decision not to prosecute.
Good Maybe be pitchforks at dawn type stuff,
Cops certainly don't seem too happy with CPS
The following is a statement made by one of the 25 individuals who claimed to have been assaulted in Leicestershire between the 1960s and 1980s and whose claims were investigated by Leicestershire’s Police Operation Enamel enquiry.
The man has expressly requested that Leicestershire Police make his statement publicly available.
In describing today’s decision as “a disgrace”, he said:
“This animal is still being protected because [of his status] and isn't able to stand trial. They say that it's not in the public interest, but isn't it in the public interest to know what his victims have gone through at the hands of this man?
“If he was an everyday person with a normal life and job, justice would [have] been served, but as it stands we victims are just being pushed to the ground again and walked over.
“Let someone feel the pain and suffering that I've endured and still going to endure for the rest of my life. It's not a case of being found guilty or going to prison - it's about being believed after so long being told that we were lying. Justice needs to be served.”
https://www.leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2015...
The following is a statement made by one of the 25 individuals who claimed to have been assaulted in Leicestershire between the 1960s and 1980s and whose claims were investigated by Leicestershire’s Police Operation Enamel enquiry.
The man has expressly requested that Leicestershire Police make his statement publicly available.
In describing today’s decision as “a disgrace”, he said:
“This animal is still being protected because [of his status] and isn't able to stand trial. They say that it's not in the public interest, but isn't it in the public interest to know what his victims have gone through at the hands of this man?
“If he was an everyday person with a normal life and job, justice would [have] been served, but as it stands we victims are just being pushed to the ground again and walked over.
“Let someone feel the pain and suffering that I've endured and still going to endure for the rest of my life. It's not a case of being found guilty or going to prison - it's about being believed after so long being told that we were lying. Justice needs to be served.”
https://www.leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2015...
Janner has a lot of friends from all sides of the political spectrum. Here is the Tory Lord Daniel Finkelstein defending him.
https://storify.com/DocRichard/debating-greville-j...
https://storify.com/DocRichard/debating-greville-j...
Even if Janner is genuinely gaga, and not just deploying the Saunders defence the establishment has done an excellent job in this case. The investigation into him has been opened, closed and shelved many times over the years until now when it can be credibly claimed that he is too senile to know his own name.
Is anyone surprised by any of this?
Is anyone surprised by any of this?
Bradgate said:
Even if Janner is genuinely gaga, and not just deploying the Saunders defence the establishment has done an excellent job in this case. The investigation into him has been opened, closed and shelved many times over the years until now when it can be credibly claimed that he is too senile to know his own name.
Is anyone surprised by any of this?
his family and supporters would be well advised to STFU rather than shouting ' he is innocent' bla blaIs anyone surprised by any of this?
There is, of course, nothing unusual in them at the top protecting their own. It goes on throughout society: every group protects itself to an extent. There is a suggestion that this is part of what attracts people to groups.
There was a pop song some years ago that had the title: You can't get me I'm part of the union a revamp of a feminist song from way back. Before feminism. Our 'shop steward', in name father of the chapel, said that whilst the bosses didn't like 'our' unions, they had their own. As we can now see.
At the time it was in the charts I was still in a union and the blokes used to whistle the tune to irritate the bosses.
What has been shocking is that the church has shown itself not so much to be included in all this, but in the vanguard.
Mental impairment is a way out of course, and is similar to whiplash in that it is very difficult to disprove.
The best the victims can hope for is for their accusations to be given a fair airing and a conclusion being allowed. The 'fact' that this person is unable to defend himself is something that is a shame, but not something that should be enough to block such a case.
The penalty would not be imprisonment or any substantial inconvenience, but it would, if the accusations are true, an exposure but I doubt that would affect him, but might harm the family. But it should be balanced against the need for the victims to have their say.
There's a bit on YouTube of victims of systemised abuse by Irish priests. One of the most heart-rending videos you'll ever see. Not to be viewed if you are feeling a bit down.
In it it is apparent from the reaction of the victims that what they want is to be believed and have the fact that they were assaulted to be accepted. For decades, and for some the vast majority of their lives, the church had denied them this, accusing them of telling lies despite the fact that they knew it was all true. These were threatened with excommunication and all that happened to the various vicars was that they were dealt with by their own version of sahria law, just like in some plantagenet despotic regime.
Absolutely horrific but there was a light: they were, at long last, believed and many said that they could, for the first time, say that they have been abused and the church had to accept it.
These victims, of some honoured chap they suggest, should be allowed to pursue the matter, fully funded, just as if the bloke was compos mentis.
Also, you never know, his faculties might, miraculously, become reestablished.
It is unfortunate, but it was ever thus. Recent changes, proposed and established, have put the likelihood of such revelations never seeing the light of day in future. All this has proved is that the tin-foil hat brigade preach a certain truth. If MI5 and SB can't protect them, then other parts of the establishment will.
A newspaper exposes the corrupt MPs and Lords and the next thing we get is an attempt, successful it seems, to limit the freedom of the press. The police federation funds a civil case against someone in their little enclave and the next thing that happens is that the home sec attacks all the money the federation has, suggesting that it was all public money.
They are all bent. And in three weeks or so I will go through the facade of cooperating with the systems and voting.
We'd all be happier if we just accepted our surfdom and believed the myth that anyone in power gives a damn.
There was a pop song some years ago that had the title: You can't get me I'm part of the union a revamp of a feminist song from way back. Before feminism. Our 'shop steward', in name father of the chapel, said that whilst the bosses didn't like 'our' unions, they had their own. As we can now see.
At the time it was in the charts I was still in a union and the blokes used to whistle the tune to irritate the bosses.
What has been shocking is that the church has shown itself not so much to be included in all this, but in the vanguard.
Mental impairment is a way out of course, and is similar to whiplash in that it is very difficult to disprove.
The best the victims can hope for is for their accusations to be given a fair airing and a conclusion being allowed. The 'fact' that this person is unable to defend himself is something that is a shame, but not something that should be enough to block such a case.
The penalty would not be imprisonment or any substantial inconvenience, but it would, if the accusations are true, an exposure but I doubt that would affect him, but might harm the family. But it should be balanced against the need for the victims to have their say.
There's a bit on YouTube of victims of systemised abuse by Irish priests. One of the most heart-rending videos you'll ever see. Not to be viewed if you are feeling a bit down.
In it it is apparent from the reaction of the victims that what they want is to be believed and have the fact that they were assaulted to be accepted. For decades, and for some the vast majority of their lives, the church had denied them this, accusing them of telling lies despite the fact that they knew it was all true. These were threatened with excommunication and all that happened to the various vicars was that they were dealt with by their own version of sahria law, just like in some plantagenet despotic regime.
Absolutely horrific but there was a light: they were, at long last, believed and many said that they could, for the first time, say that they have been abused and the church had to accept it.
These victims, of some honoured chap they suggest, should be allowed to pursue the matter, fully funded, just as if the bloke was compos mentis.
Also, you never know, his faculties might, miraculously, become reestablished.
It is unfortunate, but it was ever thus. Recent changes, proposed and established, have put the likelihood of such revelations never seeing the light of day in future. All this has proved is that the tin-foil hat brigade preach a certain truth. If MI5 and SB can't protect them, then other parts of the establishment will.
A newspaper exposes the corrupt MPs and Lords and the next thing we get is an attempt, successful it seems, to limit the freedom of the press. The police federation funds a civil case against someone in their little enclave and the next thing that happens is that the home sec attacks all the money the federation has, suggesting that it was all public money.
They are all bent. And in three weeks or so I will go through the facade of cooperating with the systems and voting.
We'd all be happier if we just accepted our surfdom and believed the myth that anyone in power gives a damn.
carinaman said:
Do Hansard keeping a record of how Lords vote on new legislation?
Can we check when Lord Janner last voted as a Peer and also when he attended the HoL and claimed his attendance fee?
I have just checked the House of Lords attendance records. He attended 15 days in November 2013, and 12 days in December 2013. His house was raided by police on 20th December 2013 and he hasn't attended since.Can we check when Lord Janner last voted as a Peer and also when he attended the HoL and claimed his attendance fee?
November 2013 http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-finance-o...
December 2013 - http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-finance-o...
January 2014 - http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-finance-o...
Just in case it hasn't been linked to before...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/g...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/g...
Greville Janner said:
There were some who felt a pang of pity for John Demjanjuk yesterday, after he was found guilty for crimes committed during the Holocaust. He is, after all, now a very old man. Ill health restricted him to his wheelchair throughout his trial, as he sat silently behind dark glasses. At times it felt hard to connect this frail figure before a Munich court with the heinous crimes that were being detailed.
But we should waste no misplaced sympathy on a man who spent so many of the final years of his long life evading justice; we should instead save our sympathy for the 28,060 innocent men, women and children, robbed of their years by Demjanjuk and by his murdering cohorts.
But we should waste no misplaced sympathy on a man who spent so many of the final years of his long life evading justice; we should instead save our sympathy for the 28,060 innocent men, women and children, robbed of their years by Demjanjuk and by his murdering cohorts.
To be honest, I'm more than a bit fed up with the continual and growing abuse of the language in these frantic attempts to put spin on the establishment's flat refusal to bring these habitual perverts to justice.
This latest, although by no means original, suggested reason for non-action in an actionable case is to do with the alleged mental health of the accused and his apparent inability to "defend himself", to "cross question witnesses", and to "present a suitable rebuttal" in a trial.
With the very loud collective defence of the indefensible heard in Westminster, isn't it rather bleeeding obvious that there would never be the slightest chance of this particular predator attempting his own defence with so many 'honourable' and 'learned' Friends available to do a cost-free bent job for him? Since when has anyone of his dubious standing ever 'defended' himself?
This latest, although by no means original, suggested reason for non-action in an actionable case is to do with the alleged mental health of the accused and his apparent inability to "defend himself", to "cross question witnesses", and to "present a suitable rebuttal" in a trial.
With the very loud collective defence of the indefensible heard in Westminster, isn't it rather bleeeding obvious that there would never be the slightest chance of this particular predator attempting his own defence with so many 'honourable' and 'learned' Friends available to do a cost-free bent job for him? Since when has anyone of his dubious standing ever 'defended' himself?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff