Greville Janner finally turned up in Court at 2.00pm for just 59 seconds before he was allowed to leave. He had not appeared when required to do so at 10.00am.
On Friday 14 Aug at 2.00pm Greville Janner, the 87 year old former Leicester MP and solicitor, finally appeared in Westminster Magistrates Court. This however had been under the direct threat that Janner would be arrested if he did not turn up and on the third hearing that day.
Janners legal team had gone to great lengths to try and prevent or delay even this brief appearance. Whilst they delayed slightly, ultimately they failed. Before describing Janner’s court appearance, it is worth recapping what his lawyers did recently to try to delay and prevent his appearance.
The previous day they had gone to the Queens Bench in the High Court of Justice.
High Court Queen’s Bench Division 13 Aug 2015
Janner’s lawyer’s grounds for “interim relief” challenged the decision of the Magistrate District Judge Riddle on 7th August that Janner was fit to turn up in order to be sent to Crown Court.
They claimed his decision was unlawful and/or irrational under three heads. First, his factual finding was not on the evidence open to him, second he failed to give any or any proper consideration to an alternative method by which the Crown could begin proceedings, that is by application to a High Court Judge for a voluntary bill of indictment (“ a voluntary bill”) which would not require the attendance of the accused, and third that enforced attendance would be a breach of the accused’s Convention rights.
The judges were not impressed with any of these arguments and gave them short shrift.
“We are not persuaded that [Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate) Howard Riddle] failed or failed adequately to consider an alternative, the application for a voluntary bill. He was not concerned with how the CPS had commenced proceedings or with the availability of any alternative. In any event, the availability of an alternative has no relevance to whether an accused be fit to attend court.
[Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate)] task was to consider and apply the legal framework which governs the sending of an accused from the Magistrates to the Crown court.
The factual findings by the [Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate)] were squarely within the range of reasonable responses open to him and were findings which a reasonable person properly directing himself in law could have made. They acknowledged the nature and procedural importance of the hearing, and the principle of open justice in the presence of the accused.”
On the humans rights points-
“It is simply unarguable that Article 3 is engaged. There is no question of torture, or of inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. As has been pointed out, breach of Article 3 requires a “minimum level of seriousness” , or a “minimum level of severity”. A high level of suffering is usually required. Claimant must show he has suffered the ill-treatment he alleges.”
“Article 8 is engaged. No parade of learning is necessary to establish that. It provides “everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his
correspondence.” The Claimant asserts that the decision that he is fit to attend court will interfere with this right. Article 8 is a qualified right and must be weighed against other considerations. In this context they include the obvious and strong public interest in ensuring those summoned to court attend when required. Equally, there is a compelling public interest in public justice. The Court must not become a place of avoidable spectacle, but it is very important that the route to justice should be public.”
The transcript unfortunately does not say what the Doctors’ qualifications or experience are, nor which Doctor appeared as a result of being asked to give evidence by the defence or prosecution.
“Drs Poole and Warner are agreed that his dementia is so advanced as to preclude his understanding of or contribution to legal proceedings. Dr Poole fears a …’catastrophic reaction’ (a medical term of art to which we return below) and likely distress irritability and anger were he brought to court.”
“We have heard uncontradicted evidence from experts. In the context of today’s
hearing he is likely to be distressed. Catastrophic distress, what it means is that the
defendant may well become intolerant of the proceedings and may indeed leave. I
further understand that it will have no long term effects, this is significant….[the
Claimant] is fit to attend for the brief nature of these proceedings…all that is
required is that he attend this court………for a comparatively brief time, he will be
free to go should he become distressed and with good will on both sides this can be
achieved in minutes. …..the medical view is that it won’t do him any good, but a
broader test as far as the court is concerned is what is in the interests of justice.
Distressing though it is, [the Claimant ie Janner] is fit to attend for the brief nature of these proceedings”
The case was adjourned until Friday 14th August 2015 when the Claimant [ie Janner] is required to attend. [my emphasis]
Janners lawyers did not appeal this judgement, which they were quite entitled to do. Janner was therefore required to attend, and everyone was entitled to expect that Janner would appear.
Whilst it does not appear to be mentioned in the transcript, The Telegraph Online reported that Janners defence wanted the hearing halted, to give time to seek judicial review of the decision that he must attend . Judge Riddle said he would not adjourn the hearing.
The High Court bid, which lasted less than an hour, has left the Janner family with a bill of at least £10,000 as costs were ordered against them .
The Mail Online reported that Janners lawyers argued “that forcing him to appear in court would be ‘barbaric, inhuman and uncivilised’, and said the move would be effectively ‘torture’ and ride roughshod over his human right to a ‘private and family life’ just so a ‘box could be ticked’. But two senior judges dismissed their application without even listening to counter arguments from prosecutors. Addressing a packed courtroom at the Royal Courts of Justice, Lady Justice Rafferty said: ‘There has been quite enough sadness and misery attached to all this – and delay.'”
Lady Justice Rafferty said the chief magistrate ‘was not wrong in his decision’ and his order for Janner to appear must stand. She added that there ‘is no question of torture’ and that his right to a family life must be ‘weighted against other considerations’. ‘In this context they include the obvious and strong public interest in ensuring those summoned to court attend when required,’ she said .
The Guardian reported that Janner’s lawyer, Ozin said Janner was a wheelchair user, had developed symptoms of Parkinson’s syndrome and had “virtually no language left” .
Westminster Magistrates Court 14 Aug 2015
Even with the number of different media sources, the exact events and timings are still unclear at this stage. However I hope this gets somewhere close to what happened, whilst some facts are clarified. Any new information is welcomed and the article will be updated.
9.45 /10.00am  Court Hearing
Louise Oakley was the prosecutor and Paul Ozin appeared for Janner’s defence. District Judge Deputy Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot was in charge of proceedings. A useful explanation of these titles and non-lay Magistrates is available on this link  or in Appendix 1 below.
Janner did not attend. Even though the High Court had required Janner to attend, he was not in attendance. Despite choosing not to appeal the High Court Judgement, Janners defence failed to ensure he complied with the requirement.
Lawyer Paul Ozin explained: “Our approach today is to facilitate Lord Janner’s appearance before this court today one way or another” .
Janners defence put forward what might possibly be generously referred to as ‘an application to allow the peer to attend via video link’ . It was reported that Lord Janner’s lawyer, Paul Ozin, said he would try to “facilitate” an appearance in court by the former Labour peer to face historic child abuse charges .
Ozin argued that Janner should be allowed to appear on camera from his place of residence . This was the option that was “least likely” to cause him to suffer . “There is evidence that moving him carries with it a risk of an adverse reaction to him, or other harm” . Within a familiar environment he is reasonably comfortable. It would not require him to be moved if the link is to his residence” . “We say that this is entirely consistent with the principles of justice” .
Ozin also argued for a second option that the peer, should appear via video link from another room in the court . He said this would be less intimidating than appearing in the dock , a third option was from a police station .
Ozin added: “It is barbaric, inhuman and uncivilised to expose a very vulnerable person to the experience I have alluded to, particularly when it is wholly unnecessary and serves no logical purpose” .
The initial hearing lasted 20 minutes  before District Judge Emma Arbuthnot adjourned the case, to consider 5 different options  / for 30 minutes / until 11.10  so the defence team could see if moving the case to Wood Green Crown Court, nearer to Janner’s home, was a viable option  /as the judge needed more time .
11.10 am Court Hearing
Defence presses defendant’s application for live video link . Ozin concedes that conditions for live link appear not to apply to defendant’s case, but he makes case for exception and seeks a “very wide interpretation” of when it is suitable to use a live link.
Lord Janner would only have to attend the court for “40 seconds”
After another 12 minutes of argument the Deputy Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot said: “I’m a bit concerned that this is becoming a timewasting [exercise]” . Addressing Mr Ozin, she said: Even if I have to have him arrested I am going to get him to court, one way and another. I am warning you… Stop messing around. We have already had three hearings. I am a bit concerned that this is becoming a time wasting exercise . She AGAIN warns defence lawyers to stop wasting time 
“Even if I have to have him arrested I am going to resolve this matter today. “I’m warning you that as time progresses I’m going to turn to the prosecution and say lets get a warrant to have him arrested. Let’s not waste time.” 
She added that Janner’s appearance ‘must be done in a humane way. I feel very strongly of that.’  The judge assured Janner’s team that if their client showed any signs of distress, she would instantly ‘abort’ his appearance . Mr Ozin then confirmed his client will appear in person this afternoon . The Mail continued “He will be allowed to arrive via the court’s side entrance and will not be forced to stand in the dock. Instead he will be wheeled into the room in his wheelchair to face the judge” 
Hearing ended approx 11.25 am 
The BBC’s home affairs correspondent, Danny Shaw, described the situation as “quite extraordinary”, adding that what had been likely to be a very brief court appearance had turned into a “legal saga”
Janner Arrives at Court
Janner leaves home for court smiling 
Around 35 journalists packed court 1 of the court building in central London, waiting for Janner to appear. Photographers and television crews lined the entrance to the court, held back by metal barriers 
2.00 pm Court Hearing
Janner walked into the the court and said “Ooh wonderful”. The dire predictions of a catastrophic result for Janner unfulfilled .
Accompanied by his daughter and his carer he smiled and waved to the gallery and the magistrate, Judge Emma Arbuthnot .
Wearing a windcheater over a well-worn green cardigan and crumpled blue shirt, he seemed both startled and excited as he looked across at the lawyers, the Press and the public gallery  .‘Ooh, this is wonderful,’ 
He sat at a desk near the entrance used for vulnerable witnesses and looked around the room  Are you Lord Janner, asked the magistrate? “Yes,” he replied 
He was allowed to leave after confirming his name and the judge had told him he was facing 22 charges. Janner was only in court for 59 seconds .
His daughter Marion, calling him “daddy”, she said: “We’re going to go home and have an ice cream” 
The Court hearing continued in Janners abscence and the 22 child abuse charges were read out. They involve “thirteen counts of indecent assault on a boy under the age of 16, five counts of buggery with a boy under the age of 16, two counts of buggery with a male aged between 16-21 without consent and two counts of indecent assault on a man aged 16 or over . They span a period from the 1963 to the 1988 . They relate to alleged attacks on young boys at a children’s home in the Leicester constituency where he was an MP  His youngest alleged victim was eight .
Janner was not required to enter pleas to any of the charges read in his absence. Janner has always denied any wrongdoing and his family say he ‘is entirely innocent’  He was released on unconditional bail with the preliminary hearing to be held at Southwark Crown Court on September 1 .
The hearing lasted 12 minutes 
Sky Report on Janners Court Appearance and say that it was not obvious that he was under any stress  See below
Other reports Huffington Post 
Janner Leaves Court
After his daughter Marion said “daddy we’re going to go home and have an ice cream”  Janner, his carer and his daughter then left the courtroom through the internal exit, avoiding the public section of the building 
He was driven away and went through two red lights 
Leaving court with daughter Marion in the silver Toyota
Janner used to live in the £2m property in West Heath Road 
He transferred that property to his children some time ago , and it is believed he has moved in 2015 possibly into a care home near Wood Green in North London . It is not known where he was pictured going after court for his ice cream . However the stick that he was reported using in court is clearly not being used as he is pulled rather than supported by his daughter.
Janner, of West Heath Road, Hampstead, North West London, is yet to enter pleas to the charges .
I am not a lawyer, nor do I want to be. I welcome correction on points of law or any other part that is wrong.
Were Janner’s legal team for the High Court really so incompetent that they did not know that Article 3 was unarguable due to “minimum level of seriousness” , or a “minimum level of severity” and a high level of suffering is usually required and the “claimant must show he has suffered the ill-treatment he alleges.”?
The judges curtly stated that no parade of learning was necessary to establish that Article 8 was engaged, but that it was a qualified right and outweighed by “obvious and strong public interest in ensuring those summoned to court attend when required. Equally, there is a compelling public interest in public justice. The Court must not become a place of avoidable spectacle, but it is very important that the route to justice should be public.” Did his legal team not know this or did they not care?
The Judges quickly dismissed Janner’s lawyer’s other points and said that the availability of an alternative has no relevance to whether an accused be fit to attend court, and they would not delay the hearing [for a Judicial Review].
Were his defence just trying it on? Did they not know the law? Were they hoping for a corrupt judge or delaying for delays sake? Were they desperate at all costs to stop Janner appearing in Court as his condition was not as bad as they were making out?
14 Aug Hearings
Janner did not appear in court at 10.00, despite being required to do so by two judges from the High Court, Lady Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Irwin, and previously by the Chief Magistrate Justice Howard Riddle. The High Court stated there was “the obvious and strong public interest in ensuring those summoned to court attend when required” . Janner plainly did not attend when required.
The High Court continued “Equally, there is a compelling public interest in public justice. The Court must not become a place of avoidable spectacle”. The spectacle and debacle at Westminster Magistrates Court on 14 Aug 2015 was easily avoidable.
It appeared to be a calculated and deliberate strategy to ignore the requirement of the court by Janners defence, thumbing their nose at the Judges, Courts, British Justice and the public.
Who is calling the shots?
If we are to accept what Janners team say about the severity of Janner’s dementia then it could not have been Janner making the decision. So who was? Who is in control?
It is not certain. Presumably, and I am open to correction, then the representatives on his powers of attorney have final say. There are two powers of Attorney 
1. Health and Welfare – the Attorneys being two children- Honourable Daniel Jospeh Mithcell Janner, Mrs Rabbi Laura Naomi Janner Klausner
[Jospeh is a well known Hebrew variant of Joseph. A brief search for Mithcell does not come up with being a similar variant. Janners biography states that Daniels middle name is Mitchell [32b][check]. It is not known whether these are mistakes on the Powers of Attorney, or whether it affects their legality and whether this corresponds to what is on his birth certificate. Elsewhere he is referred to as Daniel Joseph Mitchell Janner, for example when he was made a QC . This disparity should be cleared up.]
There could be reasons for Health and Welfare Power of Attorney to have primacy, but there are also likely to be arguments for the case to affect Property and Finance as well, so perhaps there should be discussions between all the children in both capacities.
Marion Janner was omitted from the Health and Welfare Power. The reasons for this are a matter of conjecture. In view of her own well known mental health problems with Borderline Personality Disorder, her work in mental health and her recent OBE for work in Mental Health, it might seem she was very well qualified to help make decisions for her father in this regard.
Janners legal defence was conducted in court by Paul Ozin
One of the QCs in 23 Essex Street Chambers is Greville Janners son Daniel Janner .
Was it Daniel Janner that took the decision that his father should not attend court? His name is on both Powers of Attorney and he is in the same chambers as his fathers defence team, which is unlikely to be coincidence. It seems inconceivable that he was not involved. If he was, did he inform Paul Ozin of this decision. Did they conspire together to make this decision?
Janner’s required presence was a mere formality, in order to send him forthwith to Crown Court. He just needed to be present otherwise “There exists no power in the Magistrates Court to proceed in the absence of the accused” .
The decision for Greville Janner not to be present was in direct contravention of two High Court Judges saying that he was required to be there. Why are there no sanctions on the Attorneys or on Janners legal team?
Why were the Attorneys and legal team allowed to ignore the wishes of a Magistrates court and a High Court, and allow Ozin to arrogantly state that instead of producing the defendant as requested, his approach was to facilitate Janners appearance in some form and at some time during the day. This made the court an avoidable spectacle and ignored the ruling that a defendant should turn up when required.
Why was Ozin allowed to argue for two court hearings about appearing by video link with only a warning that Janner would be arrested and a mild rebuke to stop messing about?
An ordinary member of the public would only have had a solicitor, not a barrister at Magistrates Court and they could never have wasted £10,ooo on a highly speculative High Court hearing. If they had not turned up, most people would have been arrested by bench warrant without another hearing and just a warning.
@acsdawson perhaps caught the mood with the tweet “Lord #Janner‘s lawyers propose sending a butler, 2 swans & a framed copy of his Burke’s Peerage entry to appear in court on his behalf” .
- Janner would suffer “considerable distress and harm”
- risked a ‘catastrophic reaction’
- that it was “barbaric, inhumane and uncivilised” because Janner was confined to a wheelchair and had “virtually no speech left”
- it would “expose him to a perfect storm of confusion and distress” and is not something a civilised society should contemplate.
What happened when he finally appeared at 2.00pm?
- Janner was not confined to a wheelchair, he walked albeit with a stick.
- Janner smiled
- Janner waved
- Janner said “ooh wonderful”
- Janner knew who he was and he spoke to the Magistrate
Yes he was slightly frail, and he might have been somewhat confused. However we do not know exactly how bad or variable his Alzheimers condition is, nor the extent of his alleged Parkinsons. We do not know even whether he was been told beforehand that he was going to his own trial nor what his Attorneys had told him nor when.
But the suspicion with some basis must be that Ozin exaggerated the effects of a court appearance on Janner and his condition.
How far are barristers allowed to go in defence of a client? When does over egging the pudding becoming lying and fraud? Are appropriate bodies going to take action against Janners defence team?
Westminster Magistrates Court appeared to be very accommodating for Janner, perhaps correctly if the diagnosis is correct. He was allowed to be driven straight to the side entrance not nomally open to the public. He was offered a private room to gather his thoughts. He did not have to go into the dock. He was offered a table to sit at near the door. He was allowed a carer and a member of the family. This then should be available to all in the same position, yet clearly this does not happen.
But it was a historic moment. It was the first time that Janner has been forced into court and for Janners team to have to bow to due process.
What happens next?
Janners case is due at Southwark Crown Court on Sept 1.
A crown court judge will decide if Janner is “fit to plead” and stand trial, although it is thought there will be no dispute that he is too ill because of his severe dementia. The court may conduct a ‘trial of the facts’, where a jury would hear evidence from alleged victims and decide if Janner committed the physical acts of abuse, although there would be no finding of guilt or conviction   
A good summary is also here 
Fitness to plead is explained UK Criminal Law Blog post, which is worth a look  or see Appendix 2
The public of course are right to be wary of the Justice system, doctors and diagnoses of Alzheimers due to the case of high profile Ernest Saunders in 1991 . His sentence was reduced and he was allowed out of prison as Lord Justice Neill said that he was satisfied that Saunders was suffering from pre-senile dementia associated with Alzheimer’s disease, which is incurable. After his release, he recovered from the symptoms which had led to the diagnosis.
The decision was based on evidence from Dr Patrick Gallway, a forensic pathologist, that Saunders was unable to recite three numbers backwards, was unable to use a door and his assertion that Gerald Ford rather than George Bush was the current President of the United States.
A consultant neurologist acting for the Crown, Dr Perkins, insisted that Saunders was suffering from depression rather than Alzheimer’s disease. One of the other expert witnesses, another neurologist, used brain scans and other evidence to indicate that Saunders brain was abnormally small for a man of his age, an observation which he said was consistent with a brain disease diagnosis.
They are further sceptical in this case due to the fact that Janner attended the House of Lords on 634 days, voted 203 times and claimed £104,365 in allowances since handing over power of attorney for decisions over his health and welfare in April 2009  
Janner was suspended from the Labour party in April but remains a life peer . It looks difficult to strip him of his peerage . Perhaps it is time for a petition to change the law to enable Lords to be stripped of peerage easily as Janner will not be the last to be accused of these crimes. 23 former MPs have been named peers in the list of 27 Aug 2015 
Jewish News reports that Lord Janner has been quietly dropped from top positions in Jewish community organisations . The Labour peer has been “suspended” from his role as Honorary Patron of the Holocaust Education Trust (HET), which he co-founded, while his involvement with the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) and the Community Security Trust (CST) has also come to an end in recent weeks. He has also been dropped from smaller organisations, such as the Commonwealth Jewish Council, while others, such as the Jewish Museum, said that his position was “under review”. All these decisions appear to have been taken independently of each other .
UJIA, which works with hundreds of children every year, is one of the only communal organisations where Janner still holds an honorary title. Asked this week whether this was also under review, UJIA refused to comment. A spokeswoman for the Jewish Museum, where he is still listed as Honourary Patron, said: “We’re looking into it. We’ve been discussing it at length.” Institutions in Israel have also begun removing reference to Janner, with an Israeli nursery in the Galilee town of Ma’alot Tarshiha removing the plaque for the ‘Lord Greville Janner Education Centre’ .
Janner is also being sued by six child sex victims who have launched civil compensation claims against the peer despite the fact he could still be involved in a criminal trial . “Protective Court proceedings have had to be commenced in High Court due to the time limits that apply.” Ms Dux representing the men added: “We had requested those representing Janner grant an extension of time until after the outcome of criminal proceedings were known but that request was denied. “We have, therefore, been forced to take this action to protect our clients’ interests. We are applying that the High Court stay civil proceedings until the conclusion of criminal proceedings.”
The 87-year-old peer’s family strongly denies claims he used his power to abuse vulnerable young boys at a local children’s home  .
Does the code of practice that barristers have to abide by, cover not making proceedings into a farce and laughing stock? Was Janners legal defence behaviour not covered by any code of ethics of the Bar Association or Bar Standards Board ? If so why has action not been taken against them? If not why not?
Similarly what sanctions do the court have and why did they not take any action against Janners legal team or Attorneys?
Two court hearings were wasted, when Janner should have been present. What was the cost and who paid for it?
It is difficult to see Janners treatment happening to an ordinary member of the public with dementia and Janners processing shows that power and money give a better deal from the justice system. That needs addressing and is one of the reasons why the massive child sexual abuse cover up has been allowed to happen and is still happening.
Is there no censure whatsoever for this disgusting and degrading performance by Janners Attorneys and legal team? Are they allowed to scrape the bottom of the barrel of barristers behaviour and drag British Justice into the gutter, with impunity? This type of behaviour, which must have been agreed by the Attorneys brings them into the spotlight.
Greville Janners Attorneys for Powers of Attorney
Daniel Janner born 27 April 1957, he went to Cambridge and was elected President of the Union and read law. He was a Jules Thorn Scholar and was pupil to Mr Justice Burton in Master Sherrard’s Chambers where he was a tenant for the first eight years of his practice until he joined his present chambers at 23 Essex Street. Since 1994 he has been an editor of the Criminal Appeal Reports and has served as a member of numerous Bar Council and Circuit Committees. He has been a director of research for the Society of Conservative Lawyers. In the Inn, he has been an active advocacy trainer and sponsor for many years 
Daniel was called to bar 24 July 1980 , Middle Temple  and made a QC in 2002 . He operates from 23 Essex Street, Cotswold Barristers Middlesex and Cheltenham and No 8 Chambers Birmingham  Bencher 24.11.2009, calls himself The Honourable Daniel Janner 
Interestingly there is a National Archives document shut for 62 years  with his name on it.
Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions (DPP) consulted Neil Moore — who was also based at the 23 Essex Street chambers where Daniel Janner, QC, works — before concluding that it was not in the public interest to prosecute the veteran Labour peer on child abuse charges  .
Daniel Janner has been called to the bar in the Cayman Islands . Coincidentally Ernest Saunders, he of “fake dementia fame” has acted as a consultant to Seed International Ltd, a company based in the Cayman Islands  but it is not known if there has been any contact between the two individuals.
Rabbi Laura Naomi Janner-Klausner has an extensive wikipedia entry . Born 1 August 1963 she is a British Rabbi who serves as the inaugural Senior Rabbi to the Movement for Reform Judaism. Janner-Klausner grew up in London before studying Theology at the University of Cambridge and moving to Israel in 1985, living in Jerusalem for 15 years. She returned to Britain in 1999 and was ordained at Leo Baeck College, serving as Rabbi at Alyth Gardens (North Western Reform Synagogue) until 2011, when she became inaugural holder of her current position.
Laura speaks about how, since her fathers dementia in 2010, she has taken on the “job” from her father of telling about the holocaust .
Marion Janner born 16 Aug 1959 writes and speaks about her own mental health problems with Borderline Personality Disorder which is characterised by extreme emotional pain. She was sectioned one time for this and was so moved by the lack of care that she received that she thereafter campaigns on Mental Health issues and was awarded the OBE in the 2015 New Year Honours for her work with her charity  . She has also received a lifetime achievement award 
Star Awards Video 
Appendix 1 
Chief Magistrate Who is the Chief Magistrate? The current Chief Magistrate is Senior District Judge Howard Riddle.
The Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate), as he or she is known, has a leadership responsibility for the 300-or-so District Judges (Magistrates’ Courts) (DJMCs), and Deputy DJMCs across England and Wales. The Chief Magistrate has no authority over lay magistrates, or over the several hundreds of district judges who sit in the county courts of England and Wales.
Responsibilities – The Chief Magistrate is responsible for:
- hearing many of the most sensitive or complex cases in the magistrates’ courts and in particular extradition and special jurisdiction cases.
- supporting and guiding district judge (magistrates’ courts) colleagues.
- liaising with the senior judiciary and Presiding Judges on matters relating to magistrates’ courts and district judges (magistrates’ courts).
The Chief Magistrate’s Office is also responsible for arranging sittings of Deputy DJMCs across England and Wales, and managing the hearings of disciplinary adjudications in prisons. Where a disciplinary offence by a prisoner merits additional days of imprisonment, full-time district judges are deployed to prisons to hear the cases. Requests come from prisons throughout the country – a list of cases is then built up, and when a sufficient number of cases has been generated, a judge attends the prison to hear them.
Origins of the post
When the first Chief Magistrate began sitting at Bow Street in 1735, the title wasn’t confusing at all – at the time, magistrates in London were paid judicial office-holders, and magistrates’ courts in London were presided over by Metropolitan stipendiary magistrates. All magistrates – paid and unpaid – are Justices of the Peace. Nowadays the word magistrate is more commonly used for the unpaid judicial office holders, also commonly known as JPs.
Early holders of the post also had responsibility for the Bow Street Runners, until they were replaced by the Metropolitan Police in the 19th century.
A national Bench
In 2000, the various stipendiary magistrates around the country became District Judges (Magistrates’ Courts), under the leadership of the Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate), a title conferred by parliament.
The Chief Magistrate’s Office
The Chief Magistrate’s Office provides administrative support both to the Chief Magistrate and to district judges sitting at all the magistrates’ courts in England and Wales.
The Chief Magistrate’s Office is based at:
181 Marylebone Road
DX 120551, Marylebone 9
Office global email addresses:
Judicial Deployment – firstname.lastname@example.org
Prison Section – email@example.com
|Howard Riddle||Senior District Judge (Chief Magistrate)||020 3126 3100|
|Emma Arbuthnot||Deputy Senior District Judge (Deputy Chief Magistrate)||020 3126 3100|
|Josephine Knowles||Secretary to the Chief Magistrate and Deputy Chief Magistrate||020 3126 3100|
|Nadia Manzoor||Researcher for the Chief Magistrate||020 3126 3103|
UK Criminal Law blog Fitness to Plead 
Question – The role of a jury is to say whether someone is guilty or not, right?
Answer – Generally, but not always …
Why’s that? Because not all trials are about whether a defendant is guilty or not.
Normally, at the first hearing in the Crown Court the defendant will be ‘arraigned’ – asked to say if he is guilty or not guilty. Sometimes, however, there is an issue as to whether the defendant is ‘fit to plead’ or not. This will usually be because he is suffering from some sort of mental illness.
The test is whether s/he is suffering from a ‘disability’. Lawyers often refer to the ‘Pritchard’ test (coming from the case of R v Pritchard (1836) 7 C&P 303). It can refer to any disability that would stop the defendant taking an effective part in a trial. For example, someone who doesn’t speak English would be ‘unfit to plead’, but this can be easily cured by providing an interpreter.
The questions to be addressed include:
- Can the defendant understand the proceedings?
- Do they have the intellectual capacity to put forward a defence?
- Can they challenge a juror?
- Can they understand the evidence?
- Can they understand what is meant by pleading guilty or not guilty?
- Can they give instructions to their lawyer (tell them their side of the story and how to conduct the case)?
A Judge cannot now find someone unfit unless they have the evidence of two doctors, at least one of whom is approved under the Mental Health Act.
Who decides whether someone is unfit to plead or not?
It is a Judge who decides this. If the defence ‘raise the issue’ (i.e. it is the defence lawyers saying that the defendant is unfit) then they have to show (prove) this on the ‘balance of probabilities’. In other words, it has to be shown that it is more likely than not that the defendant is unfit to plead.
The Prosecution can also raise the question, and if they do (and this is contested by the defence) then it has to be proved ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ (the usual standard for a prosecution).
What happens then?
If the defendant is found fit to plead, then the matter proceeds as normal.
If the defendant is found unfit to plead, then there is a ‘trial of issue’. This is to decide if the defendant ‘did the act or omission’ alleged against him.
The Prosecution call their evidence as normal. Because, inherent in the finding that the defendant is unfit, the defence lawyer will not have been able to get an account from the defendant, there is a limit to what they can do. They should however take an active part in the proceedings to ensure that they are fair.
What happens afterwards?
If the jury find that they are not sure that the defendant did the act, then that is the end of the matter and a ‘not guilty’ verdict entered.
It is not always clear what the ‘act or omission is’ and this can give rise to complicated arguments. But, in essence, it is those parts of an offence that don’t relate to the mental state of the alleged perpetrator. For example, if the charge is a stabbing under s18 Offences against the Person Act (1861) the jury would have to be sure that the defendant was the person who stabbed the victim, and that they were not acting in self-defence, but would not have to consider his intention at the time as that is outside of the scope of the ‘act’ done.
If the jury are sure that the defendant did the act, then the matter moves to the ‘disposal stage’. We’ve expressed it as that, rather than ‘sentence’ as it is not a question of attaching moral blame to the person so that they should be punished, rather ensuring that the public, and the defendant, are protected.
The only possible disposals are :
- Hospital Order (with or without restrictions)
- Supervision Order
- Absolute Discharge
Note that the Supervision Order is different to the Supervision Order that is sometimes imposed under a Community Order.
If someone is found to have committed the act of murder, then the only possible disposal is a Hospital Order with Restrictions.
Note: The above only applies in the Crown Court. There are different procedures in the Magistrates’ Court.
Please note that victims of abuse may be triggered by reading this information. The Sanctuary for the Abused [A] has advice on how to prevent triggers. National Association for People Abused in Childhood [B] has a freephone helpline and has links to local support groups. Other useful sites are One in Four [C] and Havoca [D]. Useful post on triggers [E] from SurvivorsJustice [F] blog.
 2015 Aug 15 Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3198863/Robert-Hardman-gives-view-Lord-Janner-hearing.html Ooh this is wonderful, said Lord Janner as he finally shuffled in to court… for a hearing on child sex charges which lasted just 59 seconds
 2015 Jun 24 Cathy Fox Blog Greville Janner- Two Powers of Attorney – Health and Welfare, Property and Financial https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2015/06/24/greville-janner-2-powers-of-attorney-health-and-welfare-property-and-financial/
 2015 Aug 14 Huffington Post Lord Janner Appears In Court For Sex Abuse Hearing After Judge Threatened To Arrest Him http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/14/lord-janner-arrested-judge-peer-child-abuse_n_7987286.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
 2015 Aug 14 ITV Lord Janner attends court for first time over abuse claims http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-08-14/lord-janner-attends-court-for-first-time-over-abuse-claims/vGreville Janner has been charged with offences ranging from the 1960s to the 1980s
 @JoshHalliday Are you Lord Janner, asked the magistrate? “Yes,”
 2015 Aug 14 Sky News Lord Janner In Court To Face Child Sex Charges http://news.sky.com/story/1535829/lord-janner-in-court-to-face-child-sex-charges
 2015 Aug 14 Channel 4 http://www.channel4.com/news/lord-janner-fails-to-show-up-to-court good Using a walking stick
 Legal 500 23 essex http://www.legal500.com/firms/9335/offices/9335/lawyers/8116
 2015 Aug 14 @BBCDanielS LJ Rafferty point 1 “There exists no power in the Magistrates Court to proceed in the absence of the accused.”
LJ Rafferty point 2 “The Court must not become a place of avoidable spectacle, but v important that the route to justice should be public.”
 2015 Aug 14 Standard Lord Janner says ‘oooh this is wonderful’ as he finally appears in court on abuse charges http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/lord-janner-fails-to-appear-at-court-to-face-historic-child-sex-abuse-charges-a2633366.html desk for vu;nerable witnesses Paul Ozin, appearing for the peer, told Westminster magistrates court: “We say that this is entirely consistent with the principles of justice.”He also argued for a second option that the peer, who is suffering from severe dementia, should appear via video link from another room in the court.He added: “It is barbaric, inhuman and uncivilised to expose a very vulnerable person to the experience I have alluded to, particularly when it is wholly unnecessary and serves no logical purpose.”Louise Oakley, prosecuting, said their position was that the former MP should attend in person but one option was that he could be allowed to appear at Wood Green crown court which was closer to his home.But judges had said the public interest outweighed any personal distress Janner might be caused and he arrived at the central London court at about 1.30pm.
 2015 Aug 14 @acsdawson Lord #Janner‘s lawyers propose sending a butler, 2 swans & a framed copy of his Burke’s Peerage entry to appear in court on his behalf.
 2015 Aug 14 @czarkaztik The Czar retweeted #Janner 2pm or arrest warrant. Note for his minder: tell him he’s off to HoL to collect expenses. Sorted.
 2015 Aug 14 Wales Online Lord Janner’s lawyer in court video link bid as peer faces child sex charges http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/lord-janners-lawyer-court-video-9856323 “the obvious and strong public interest in ensuring those summoned to court attend when required”. District Judge Emma Arbuthnot adjourned the case for 30 minutes so the defence team could see if moving the case to Wood Green Crown Court, nearer to Janner’s home, was a viable option.
 2015 Aug 14 Express Lord Janner FINALLY arrives in court over sex abuse claims after judge threat http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/598336/Lord-Janner-no-show-court-ruling-must-attend-hearing photo ozin
 2015 Aug 14 Mail Online *** earlier ‘Come on Dad, let’s go for an ice cream’: Lord Janner, 87, finally appeared in court to face 22 charges of child sex abuse in 59-second hearing before his daughter took him home http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3197581/Lord-Janner-avoid-walking-court-face-child-sex-abuse-charges-lawyers-apply-appear-video-link-instead.html Accompanied by his daughter and his carer he smiled and waved to the gallery and the magistrate, Judge Emma Arbuthnot. She then asked him: ‘Are you Lord Janner’ and in a high-pitched voice he replied: ‘Yes’.
 2015 Aug 14 ExaroNews @ExaroNews
Lord Janner: a lot of people at Westminster mags court. You know why. Qu is: will defendant be there in line with court order? defence presses defendant’s application for live video link. defence concedes that conditions for live link appear not to apply to defendant’s case, but he makes case for exception. defence seeks a “very wide interpretation” of when it is suitable to use a live link. “Even if have to have him arrested, I am going to resolve this matter today,” deputy chief magistrate Emma Arbuthnot.
deputy chief magistrate Emma Arbuthnot tells defence lawyers to “stop messing around”.
deputy chief magistrate Emma Arbuthnot, AGAIN warns defence lawyers to stop wasting time.
 2015 Aug 14 Guardian Lord Janner arrives at court after judge threatens to arrest him http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/14/lord-janner-to-appear-in-court-over-child-sex-abuse-charges Ozin told the high court on Thursday that Janner was a wheelchair user, had developed symptoms of Parkinson’s syndrome and had “virtually no language left”. He said it would be “barbaric, inhumane and uncivilised” to force him to appear in court in person, and that it would be a breach of his human rights.
 2015 Aug 14 BBC Lord Janner not at court to face child sex abuse charges http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33923041 His family says he is innocent. Mr Ozin added: “There is evidence that moving him carries with it a risk of an adverse reaction to him, or other harm.” Alternatively, he suggested Lord Janner could appear by video from within the court building – which he said would be less intimidating than appearing in the dock – or from a police station. Emma Arbuthnot refused the request, saying a hearing would only last “40 seconds” and the peer did not need to “gaze around the court” The BBC’s home affairs correspondent, Danny Shaw, described the situation as “quite extraordinary”, adding that what had been likely to be a very brief court appearance had turned into a “legal saga”.
 2015 Aug 14 ExaroNews @ExaroNews Lord Janner: deputy chief mag Emma Arbuthnot, at Westminster mags court, says that she needs more time, so adjourns hearing until 11.10am.
 2015 Aug 14 Independent ‘Oooh, this is wonderful’. Bewildered Lord Janner finally goes to court to face 22 counts of child sex offences http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lord-janner-child-sex-abuse-charges-live-former-labour-mp-fails-to-appear-in-westminster-magistrates-cour-10455271.html Following the decision, Mr Ozin told the court arrangements for Lord Janner’s appearance at the Westminster court “were always in place anyway” but urged the press to remember that the peer was a “vulnerable man”.
 2015 Aug 14 Leicester Mercury Greville Janner to appear in court “one way or another” on abuse charges http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Greville-Janner-appear-court-way-child-abuse/story-27607696-detail/story.html
Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle ruled that although he would not be a party to proceedings because of his illness there was no physical barrier to prevent him attending in person for a brief procedural hearing and warned he could face arrest if he was not produced. Mr Ozin, representing Lord Janner on behalf of his family, launched a High Court bid to block the threat of an arrest warrant on the grounds that a court appearance would breach his human rights. But two top judges yesterday rejected the application and Lady Justice Rafferty said: “The route to justice must be public.” Janner, of West Heath Road, Hampstead, North West London, is yet to enter pleas to the charges.
 2015 Aug 14 CourtNewsUK @CourtNewsUK Deputy Chief Mag Emma Arbuthnot now entertaining five different options for Janner (non) appearance
 2015 April 4 Needleblog How to strip a Lord of his Title https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/28/peer-pressure-how-to-strip-a-lord-of-his-title/
 2015 Aug 13 Channel 4 News Lord Janner ‘a hollow shell’ of his former self says friend http://www.channel4.com/news/lord-janner-a-hollow-shell-of-his-former-self-says-friend-child-abuse-charges-court would cause “extreme distress”
 2015 Aug 13 Jewish Chronicle Janner fails to overturn magistrate’s court ruling http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/142251/janner-fails-overturn-magistrates-court-ruling
 2015 Aug 13 Janner IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CO/3768/2015 QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION Transcript https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/r-ono-lord-janner-v-westminster-mags-ct-and-cps.pdf
 Lou Collins Janner and Saunders & Garden Court Chambers Link http://loucollins.uk/2015/06/24/janner-and-saunders-garden-court-chambers-link/
 2006 Greville Janner To Life The Memoirs of Lord Janner ISBN 0 7509 4629 6
[32a p87] All children born at Royal Free Hospital Daniel born 1957 Apr 27, Marion 16 Aug 1959 and Laura on 1 Aug 1963.
[32b] page 152 Daniels middle name is Mitchell
 Southwark Crown Court info
 Accessed 2015 Aug 24 Courts and Tribunal Judiciary https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/who-are-the-judiciary/judicial-roles/judges/chief-magistrate/
 2015 Jul 10 Jewish News Lord Janner quietly dropped from top positions in community organisations http://www.jewishnews.co.uk/lord-janner-quietly-dropped-from-top-positions-in-community-organisations/ Alison Saunders trained at I Garden Court Chambers, London in 1983. Lord Janner practised at 1 Garden Court Chambers from 1956 to 1986.
 2015 Aug 20 Mirror Tom Pettifor Lord Janner sued by six alleged victims who claim he abused them as children http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lord-janner-sued-six-alleged-6288407
 2008 April North West Nationalist blogspot Greville Janner “Alleged” Paedophile, on the BNP http://northwestnationalists.blogspot.co.uk/2008/04/greville-janner-alleged-paedophile-on.html?m=1
 Jewish Virtual Library http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/janner.html
 2015 Apr 22 Daily Mail Janner gave his children deeds to his £2m home at height of abuse probe in echo of Stuart Hall case, move could slash potential payouts http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3051384/Janner-gave-children-deeds-2m-home-height-abuse-probe-echo-Stuart-Hall-case-slash-potential-payouts.html
 2015 Aug 15 Daily Mail Ooh this is wonderful, said Lord Janner as he finally shuffled in to court… for a hearing on child sex charges which lasted just 59 seconds http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3198863/Robert-Hardman-gives-view-Lord-Janner-hearing.html
 You Tube Greville Janner, a victim of vile anti-Semitic allegations features Laura Janner https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fcOQ-65VA&feature=youtu.be “As a veteran politician, one makes enemies; being a Jewish community leader and advocate of Israel exposes me to baseless attacks on my honour. That’s what we’re seeing here.” – Lord Greville Janner, January 2009
 2015 Aug 14 The Times Janner finally appears in court – for under a minute http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article4527535.ece
 2015 Aug 14 Huffington Post Lord Janner Appears In Court For Sex Abuse Hearing After Judge Threatened To Arrest Him http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/14/lord-janner-arrested-judge-peer-child-abuse_n_7987286.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
 2015 Apr 16 Full Fact Lord Janner prosecution decision: process or plot? https://fullfact.org/factcheck/law/lord_janner_prosecution_process_plot-42633
 2015 Apr 24 Daily Mail The rape of justice: Damning new evidence of Labour peer Lord Janner’s child sex abuse covered up by police and social workers for over 20 years http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3054583/The-rape-justice-Damning-new-evidence-Labour-peer-Lord-Janner-s-child-sex-abuse-covered-police-social-workers-20-years.html
 Change London Marion Janner http://www.change-london.org.uk/author/marion-janner/ I’ve got a mental illness – the confusingly and not exactly affirmingly named Borderline Personality Disorder, which has brought me into contact with many professionals, from psychiatrists to A&E nurses.
 2015 Aug 24 Butlincat Lord Janner sued by six alleged victims who claim he abused them as children 20/08/15 + JANNER ARCHIVE https://butlincat.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/lord-janner-sued-by-six-alleged-victims-who-claim-he-abused-them-as-children-200815-janner-archive/
 Maslaha Marion Janner OBE http://maslaha.org/about/whos-involved/people/advisers/marion-janner-obe
 The Law Pages Daniel Janner http://www.thelawpages.com/legal-directory/Daniel-Joseph-Mitchell-Janner-QC-2016-3.law
 Legal Hub http://www.legalhub.co.uk/legalhub/app/document?rs=&vr=&src=ri&docguid=Ie6aa7e208bca11dcaa9aaaaa0e13eb96&suppsrguid=ia744c0970000013be5791e0e80762274&spos=2&epos=2&td=2&ctype=The%20Bar%20Directory&bctocguid=I90d70a708bd111dcaa9aaaaa0e13eb96&bchistory=5;6;&ststate=A;S;S;S&linktype=ref&querylink=true&toc-search=true
 Members of the Bench http://preview.inco-soft.net/MT/members/masters-of-the-bench/directory/2890/index.html@showall=true&page=1.html At Cambridge Daniel Janner was elected President of the Union and read law. He was a Jules Thorn Scholar and was pupil to Mr Justice Burton in Master Sherrard’s Chambers where he was a tenant for the first eight years of his practice until he joined his present chambers at 23 Essex Street. Since 1994 he has been an editor of the Criminal Appeal Reports and has served as a member of numerous Bar Council and Circuit Committees. He has been a director of research for the Society of Conservative Lawyers. In the Inn, he has been an active advocacy trainer and sponsor for many years.
 2002 Apr 16 The Gazette Daniel Janner QC https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/L-56538-1002 Crown Office House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW 9 April 2002 The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal dated 9 April 2002 The Honourable Daniel Joseph Mitchell Janner et al to be Her Majesty’s Counsel learned in the Law. C I P Denyer
 National Archives Daniel Janner http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C14382997
 2015 Aug 13 Telegraph Lord Janner lawyers lose bid to prevent him appearing in court on child sex charges http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11800410/Lord-Janner-lawyers-lose-bid-to-prevent-him-appearing-in-court-on-child-sex-charges.html Wanted Judicial Review They say Lord Janner, who has Alzheimer’s disease, will suffer “considerable distress and harm”, Friday’s hearing should not go ahead to give him time to apply for a judicial review, “barbaric, inhumane and uncivilised” because he is confined to a wheelchair and had “virtually no speech left”. Paul Ozin QC, who was representing the former MP said making him attend a short magistrates’ court hearing would “expose him to a perfect storm of confusion and distress” and is not something a civilised society should contemplate. Mr Ozin told appeal judges: “Vulnerable people who have no memory left are also entitled to dignity. listed in this court at 10am on Friday morning. As things stand, Lord Janner is expected to attend.”The judge said two alternative settings for the hearing – Wood Green Crown Court, which is closer to Lord Janner’s home, and another room at Westminster Magistrates’ Court – had not been accepted by his lawyers.
 2015 Apr 17 Independent Lord Janner criticised justice system for excusing alleged Nazi war criminal who had dementia http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lord-janner-criticised-justice-system-for-excusing-alleged-nazi-war-criminal-who-had-dementia–but-now-hes-in-the-same-position-10183717.html
 2012 Sept 7 Jewish Chronicle Britain is full of people ﬁghting hatred. We are lucky to live here http://www.thejc.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-features/82477/britain-full-people-%EF%AC%81ghting-hatred-we-are-lucky-live-here “I don’t care what bloody age they are,” says Lord Janner. “These criminals should have been dealt with years ago.”
 2011 May 13 Telegraph Nazi criminal John Demjanjuk deserves no sympathy http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/8512103/Nazi-criminal-John-Demjanjuk-deserves-no-sympathy.html 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.
 Wikipedia Laura Janner-Klausner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Janner-Klausner
 2006 Amazon To Life Greville Janner http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0750946296?keywords=to%20life%20janner&qid=1440612785&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1
 2015 c May Independent Lord Janner ‘voted 203 times in House of Lords after dementia diagnosis’ http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/lord-janner-voted-203-times-in-house-of-lords-after-dementia-diagnosis–eysd5vlxbZ Exaro.com looked at public information published by Parliamentary offices to determine that Janner attended the House of Lords on 634 days and claimed £104,365 in allowances since handing over power of attorney for decisions over his health and welfare in April 2009.
 2015 Aug 27 Politics Home Full list of dissolution peerages https://www.politicshome.com/home-affairs/articles/news/full-list-dissolution-peerages
 Anorak http://www.anorak.co.uk/417024/politicians/lord-janner-iffy-evidence-jews-ernest-saunders-victims-without-question-and-magic.html/ The Times (page 5): “Revealed: link between DPP and Janner’s son” The principal legal adviser to the director of public prosecutions is a barrister who worked in the same chambers as the son of Lord Janner of Braunstone until late last year, The Times has learnt. The Crown Prosecution Service has confirmed that Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions (DPP), consulted Neil Moore — who was based at the 23 Essex Street chambers where Daniel Janner, QC, works — before concluding that it was not in the public interest to prosecute the veteran Labour peer on child abuse charges.
[A] Sanctuary for the Abused http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.co.uk/2006/07/for-survivors-coping-with-triggers-if.html
[E] SurvivorsJustice Triggers post http://survivorsjustice.com/2014/02/26/triggers-what-are-they-and-how-do-we-work-through-them/
This is all written in good faith but if there is anything that needs to be corrected please email firstname.lastname@example.org
cathyfox the truth will out, the truth will shout, the truth will set us free