2016 Jun 5 Sunday Times James Gillespie – Janner family claims ‘victims’ just want payoff

Most people might think that the Janner family are more motivated by money than the victims are. The article is first and then a few observations.

Sunday Times Janner family claims ‘victims’ just want payoff 2016 Jun 5 [1] by James Gillespie

The family of the late Baron Janner of Braunstone has launched a fierce
attack on the Goddard sex abuse inquiry, describing it as “a paradigm of
injustice” and accusing some alleged victims of lying to win compensation.

A 9,000-word document submitted to the inquiry last week by the family’s
solicitor, Michael Pether of BLM, accuses Leicestershire police — who
brought a case against Janner before he died — of being swept up in a
“moral panic” and failing to investigate the possibility of collusion by
complainants who were, the document alleges, telling “transparent” lies.

He adds that there is “strong evidence” of collusion in some complainants’
stories and that many were making allegations “with a view to obtaining
compensation, spurred on by lawyers working on [no win, no fee] contingency
fees”.

The document is understood to give details of why the family lawyers
believe the claims against Janner are “patently false” and points out:
“Almost all the complainants have lengthy and serious convictions for
dishonesty. The number of claims has grown very considerably as the
prospect of civil damages has arisen.”

The comments are bound to cause anger among the claimants and their lawyers
who have always maintained they are not motivated by money. Liz Dux, a sex
abuse lawyer from the firm Slater and Gordon who represents 16 of the
alleged victims, said: “To suggest that Janner’s alleged victims are driven
by compensation is a wilful misrepresentation of the situation — they are
driven by the pursuit of justice and the truth. None of my clients even
thought about civil action until a decision was made not to prosecute him.
When he died the civil jurisdiction provided the only opportunity they had
to prove their very serious claims.”

Six of her clients are claiming damages against the Janner estate and more
are expected to follow. Janner’s estate at his death was estimated at
around £2m.

Goddard appealed to the Janner family for defence evidence after a Sunday
Times investigation raised questions about some claims. The family refuses
to take part in the inquiry as witnesses will not be cross-examined in
public hearings, due to begin in September. It is the first time the
family’s anger at the allegations has been so explicitly stated since
Janner died last December. At the time he was facing prosecution on 22
charges of abuse, but the deterioration in his mental health meant that he
could not stand trial. Instead, a “trial of the facts” was due to be held
but was scrapped after his death.

At the time Janner’s three children — Daniel, 59, a leading QC; Laura
Janner-Klausner, 52, senior rabbi to the Movement for Reform Judaism; and
Marion, 56, OBE, a mental health campaigner — said their father was
innocent of all wrongdoing, but have since made no public statements.

It is understood the document — details of which have been shown to The
Sunday Times by a source close to the inquiry — refers to two claims of
abuse in Leicester, where Janner was an MP for 27 years, at times when he
was abroad. Another refers to an alleged assault taking place in Leicester
when Janner was not in the city, and another alleged attack in Scotland has
been dismissed by police. One claims he was assaulted by Janner during a
visit at the Commons in 1969. Janner did not become an MP until 1970.

The family, and some in the legal profession, are concerned that Ben
Emmerson, QC, counsel to the inquiry, has said that “findings of fact” will
be made in the case of individual complainants. The document says this puts
the family in an “invidious position” as the inquiry could make rulings
before the civil damages case, which would be “unjust”.

The lawyer’s letter urges Goddard not to make such findings or to adjourn
the inquiry until after the civil action. It accuses the Leicestershire
police of leaking information to the press in an effort to persuade the
director of public prosecutions, Alison Saunders, to authorise a
prosecution — which she had originally declined to do because of Janner’s
failing health. “The actions of the Leicestershire police bring into
question the . . . impartiality of an investigating force,” it says.

A family friend said: “This will cause major problems for Goddard. They
appear to have picked on Janner because they thought the case was
‘low-hanging fruit’ and would give them an easy start. Now it’s turning
into a nightmare.”

A Leicestershire police spokesman said: “The inquiry has not yet commenced
and . . . it would be improper to discuss the documents we have provided or
documents supplied by other parties.”

A spokeswoman for the Goddard inquiry said: “The Inquiry is engaged in a
process of evidence gathering and is considering which witnesses will give
oral evidence at the hearings.”

The Janner family declined to comment.

end of Times article

Who is the source close to the inquiry that has shown this report to the press?

If true then a serious breach of confidence would have been committed by the IICSA inquiry, and Goddard should immediately investigate this breach.

The Janner family is now represented by BLM’s Michael Pether, who is not a senior partner in the firm.

Michael Pether  Partner BLM “the family’s solicitor”

michaelpetherblmGiven the family’s views of the Inquiry why has Michael Pether not made this point about breach of confidence forcefully to the Inquiry, and asked for an investigation and an apology?

Is it because the thrust of the article appears to coincide with the interests of the Janner family. Is the “source close to the inquiry” a “false flag”, a cover for someone sympathetic to the Janner family?

Pether states that “there is “strong evidence” of collusion in some complainants’ stories and that many were making allegations “with a view to obtaining compensation, spurred on by lawyers working on [no win, no fee] contingency fees””

No evidence is given for these allegations repeated in the newspaper, but no doubt defamation laws have been skirted around. The article says that the family refuses to take part in the inquiry as “witnesses will not be cross-examined in public hearings”. Again I think this is carefully worded to market the family’s decision not to take part in the Inquiry.

“Almost all the complainants have lengthy and serious convictions for dishonesty” is a statement that should be career defining for Michael Pether unless he has solid evidence for this. “Almost all” is a very high bar. Even then of course, being raped by an MP tends to affect peoples views of “dishonesty”. It also leads to alcohol and drug addiction and these things are what perpetrators and their gatekeepers have relied on for years to cover up their crimes.

Janner’s family said before his death that he was “entirely innocent of any wrongdoing”. This however was a response from some time ago, not repeated since, except by the lazy corporate media. The family of course could not possibly know whether he was innocent, nor back it up with any evidence, unless they were there on each and every occasion that abuse was alleged is not made clear, or have similar strong evidence. Statements made since are more realistic and prosaic eg cases will be “strongly contested”.

If the no win no fee seriously affects justice, (and it might), why did Greville and Daniel Janner or Michael Pether never bring this up before, and made their feelings known to the legal powers that be? Did they not realise this before?

The Mirror reported recently that “Executors of Labour peer Lord Janner’s will have set aside £1 million to cover potential compensation claims by victims of his alleged child sex abuse. Probate records show that Janner left more than £2.1 million, around half of which has been frozen pending the outcome of legal claims by at least six of his alleged victims.” [4]

I am unsure as to the legal arguments as to why the whole amount is not frozen. The reason given by Lix Dux , “No official freezing order has been obtained as that would involve unnecessary legal expense in a situation where it is in everyone’s interest to preserve as much of the estate as possible”[4] appears somewhat trite, given that Janner’s many victims appear to be left with only £1 million fight for, rather than £2.1 million. Trite also when you compare what “compensation” the victims received from Savile estate and Trusts compared to what the lawyers received.

The victims are many more than six. 27 individual complainants were given core participant status in the Goddard Inquiry and my estimate of victims would be well over a hundred. Thus £1 million will not go far, and the probability is that yet again lawyers will end up richer than those abused, a point ignored by lawyers.

Daniel, lawyer son of child abuser and lawyer, Greville Janner

danny boy

Laura and Marion Janner, daughters of child abuser Greville Janner

laura adnmarion janner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For more on Janners family see 2015 Aug 27 Cathy Fox Blog Just a minute, Janner..[2] 

Interesting also that the family is now represented by BLM, rather than the previous chambers 23 Essex Street Chambers, where Daniel Janner is QC.

BLM

BLM have the following on their website [3]. It is interesting that they are an insurance and risk law firm.

“With strong ambitions for growth and expansion, BLM’s goal is to be recognised as one of the leading global insurance and risk law specialists by 2020. The firm has now broken through the £100m barrier and has the strength and breadth to work with more customers across more lines of business and in more locations.

In 2014, we restructured our business to reflect our customers’ needs. Today, we are more than an insurance and risk law firm – we understand and are firmly embedded into our sector. As well as having more experts in the sector than any of our competitors, our ‘one team’ philosophy is delivering extraordinary outcomes for our customers. Fundamentally, we are helping them to reduce the time and money they spend on managing risk and resolving disputes.

BLM has an efficient service delivery model that maximises our skills, training and intelligence to help make our customers’ lives better and more successful. It is for this reason that we are described in customer surveys and legal directories as a firm with “its finger on the pulse of the market” and as a “technical powerhouse”.

We have established a deep-rooted presence in the general insurance sector, the London Market and amongst brokers. We also have a significant presence among corporate businesses many of whom are multi-national, the public sector and the health and care industry.

Our team of over 200 partners and more than 800 legal specialists are completely dedicated to the insurance and risk market and are recognised for having the capability, creativity and energy to support our customers and help them find solutions to their problems. We regard their problems as our problems and we are here to help solve them.”

Once again corporate media and lawyers play games for their their own ends and financial benefit, whilst justness goes begging and victims get peanuts.

Please note that victims of abuse may be triggered by reading this information. These links are generally UK based.

  • 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.
  • Jim Hoppers pages on Mindfulness[G]  and Meditation[H] may be useful.
  • Hwaairfan blog An Indigenous Australian Approach to Healing Trauma[J]
  • Survivors UK for victims and survivors of male rape or the sexual abuse of men [K]
  • Voicing CSA group [L] helps arrange survivors meetings in your area

Links

[1] 2016 Jun 5 Sunday Times James Gillespie Janner family claims ‘victims’ just want payoff http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/janner-family-claims-victims-just-want-payoff-xwcn5bdx6

[2] 2015 Aug 27 Cathy Fox Blog Just a minute, Janner.. https://cathyfox.wordpress.com/2015/08/27/just-a-minute-janner/

[3] BLM http://www.blmlaw.com/1879/pages/about-us.html

[4] 2016 May 8 Mirror Lord Janner’s estate sets £1m aside for ‘abuse’ fund claimed by alleged victims http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/lord-janners-estate-sets-1m-7927926

[5] IICSA Inquiry announces decisions in core participant applications https://www.iicsa.org.uk/news/inquiry-announces-decisions-core-participant-applications

 

 

Advertisements

About cathy fox blog on Child Abuse

the truth will out, the truth will shout, the truth will set us free...
This entry was posted in #OpDeathEaters, cathy fox blog, Child sexual abuse, IICSA Goddard / Jay child sexual abuse Inquiry, IICSA Independent panel inquiry into child sexual abuse, Labour Party, Leicestershire, Newspaper Articles, VIP CSA, VIPs MPs Lords etc and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to 2016 Jun 5 Sunday Times James Gillespie – Janner family claims ‘victims’ just want payoff

  1. artmanjosephgrech says:

    The Goddard Inquiry has the power to compel the Sunday Times to reveal the source of the alleged leak and if established that it came from within the inquiry seek the prosecution and imprisonment of he individual(s) concerned but equally it is in the National and Public Interest for the police to launch their own inquiry and to establish if the lead came from within the inquiry or from other interests with access to the document. It is interesting that the forces using the same allegations persuaded David Cameron, now Prime Minister and Tom Watson, now Deputy Leader of Labour Party as members of truth seeker Chris Mullin chairing the Home Affairs Select Committee to recommend an effective end of police investigations and civil compensation payments.
    However take heart for as Arthur Mildon, now the distinguished former Judge explained at the outlet of the Gates Inquiry, the barristers, the solicitors and staff, some 50 assembled the first day as core participants, will start off by not attacking each others clients and the bodies they work for, and concentrate on the neighbours, the foster parents and the acting local police commander hero George Medal recipient (Balcombe Street Siege) believed to be the whistleblower, but as the evidence emerges you will see them begin to try and apportion blame on each other.

    Counsel for the statutory Inquiry will be aware that some of the legal representatives for some interests will conspire, whoops a slip, I mean have both formal and informal meetings on how they will set about discrediting the complainants as West Yorkshire Police attempted to stop at Hillsborough Inquest and Police in he Midland attempted to stop a further Inquest re the Birmingham Bombing which was but one of the many acts of terrorism the Midlands experienced
    If as I believe the Inquiry will be only too well aware of the forces at work they will also be prepared for the subsequent attack that whatever they publish findings and reports with tactics and plans to discredit already laid by vested interests. Colin Smart

  2. Pingback: Index / Timeline Newspaper clippings blogged by Cathy Fox Blog | cathy fox blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s