Pressure is building on the director of public prosecutions to reverse her decision not to prosecute Lord Janner over child abuse claims after cross-party figures signed a letter to the Times.
Labour’s Simon Danczuk, the Tories’ Zac Goldsmith, the Greens’ Caroline Lucas and others say the decision has damaged public confidence in the criminal justice system.
The mayor of London also weighed in, saying he would like to see a trial of facts and a second opinion from doctors on Janner’s ability to stand trial.
“I think it’s very important that nobody should be under any impression Greville Janner has had an easy ride from the CPS or has been in some way allowed to escape justice,” Boris Johnson said during his LBC Radio phone-in show.
Johnson, who is standing as a Conservative parliamentary candidate, added: “It may be that there is a way forward. It may be that [the DPP] Alison Saunders can think of some approach that would allow the facts of the case to be tested in some legal way without, as it were, putting Lord Janner on trial.
“I also think it might be reasonable for people to be satisfied, doubly sure, that the medical disqualification ... is actually valid. I think we might need a second opinion from the doctors.”In the letter the cross-party figures ask: “Have we learnt anything from the mistakes of the past? As long as justice is not seen to be done and the greater public interest is not served, the public will see attempts to investigate establishment figures involved in historic[al] child abuse as a whitewash.”
Last week, Saunders said that the former Labour MP for Leicester West would not face the courts because four separate doctors – two appointed by prosecutors and two by Janner’s family – ruled that he was unfit to plead or understand the court.
Yet, the House of Lords confirmed that Janner signed an official document just 11 days ago, the Guardian reported on Monday. A letter sent to the clerk of the parliaments released to the Guardian shows the peer’s signature appeared on a request for a leave of absence on 9 April.
A spokesman for the Lords said the signature matched previous examples from the peer and there was no reason to believe that it was signed by someone else. Leicestershire police have said they would consider contacting the House of Lords about the letter as part of Operation Enamel, their investigation into Janner and other alleged paedophiles.
People with dementia have been prosecuted before the courts. But the decision about whether an individual is fit to stand trial is made by the Crown Prosecution Service on a case-by-case basis. Janner was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease in 2009.
The letter to the Times, co-ordinated by Danczuk, the incumbent MP for Rochdale who co-wrote a book about the Cyril Smith child sex abuse scandal, said: “The CPS has acknowledged the case against Lord Janner passes its evidential test, and there are established precedents in proceeding with cases against defendants with advanced dementia. Defendants have been charged with child abuse and found guilty in their absence.
“One man’s ill health cannot be a barrier to the greater public interest. Clearly this is damaging public confidence. Mrs Saunders must recognise this and immediately reverse her decision – or look at other routes to providing justice.”
At least 10 men with dementia have been convicted of child sex offences since 2010, including six in the past year. The CPS said Saunders made the decision not to prosecute on her own and that any related further inquiries were a matter for the police.
“Lord Janner is suffering from a degenerative dementia which is rapidly becoming more severe. He requires continuous care both day and night,” the CPS said on Tuesday. “His evidence could not be relied upon in court and he could not have any meaningful engagement with the court process, and the court would find it impossible to proceed. The condition will only deteriorate, there is no prospect of recovery.”
His family said last week that he was entirely innocent of any wrongdoing.
“As the Crown Prosecution Service indicated … this decision does not mean or imply that any of the allegations that have been made are established or that Lord Janner is guilty of any offence,” a statement said.
