This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/14/lord-janner-to-appear-in-court-over-child-sex-abuse-charges
The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Lord Janner to appear in court over child sex abuse charges | Lord Janner to appear in court over child sex abuse charges |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| Greville Janner is expected to appear in court on Friday to face child sex abuse charges after his lawyers lost a high court bid to prevent him having to attend. | |
| The former Labour peer, 87, is due to attend Westminster magistrates court in central London for his first appearance over allegations that he sexually abused nine boys over three decades. | |
| Lord Janner’s lawyers told the high court on Thursday that compelling him to attend would be a breach of his human rights and have a “catastrophic impact” on his health, due to his severe Alzheimer’s. | Lord Janner’s lawyers told the high court on Thursday that compelling him to attend would be a breach of his human rights and have a “catastrophic impact” on his health, due to his severe Alzheimer’s. |
| But the legal challenge was summarily dismissed by Lady Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Irwin, who said there was a strong public interest in suspects attending court. | But the legal challenge was summarily dismissed by Lady Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Irwin, who said there was a strong public interest in suspects attending court. |
| If the peer does not attend the brief hearing, he could be arrested or prosecutors could ask the court for a voluntary bill of indictment to allow the case to proceed in his absence. | |
| On Thursday, lawyers for both sides attempted to thrash out a solution that would allow the case to proceed with minimum distress to Janner and his family. It was suggested that the hearing may be moved to Wood Green crown court, nearer Janner’s home in north London, but prosecutors said late on Thursday that it was still listed for Westminster magistrates court. | |
| Janner’s family strongly denies the 22 child sex abuse allegations, in which he is accused of molesting nine boys between 1963 and 1988. | Janner’s family strongly denies the 22 child sex abuse allegations, in which he is accused of molesting nine boys between 1963 and 1988. |
| Paul Ozin, for Janner, asked two senior high court judges to spare the 87-year-old the “barbaric, inhumane and uncivilised” ordeal by lifting the threat of an arrest warrant if he failed to attend. | Paul Ozin, for Janner, asked two senior high court judges to spare the 87-year-old the “barbaric, inhumane and uncivilised” ordeal by lifting the threat of an arrest warrant if he failed to attend. |
| Ozin told two senior judges: “Lord Janner’s dementia is now at such a level of severity that it amounts to a perfect storm in terms of the adverse impact on him of attending court. | Ozin told two senior judges: “Lord Janner’s dementia is now at such a level of severity that it amounts to a perfect storm in terms of the adverse impact on him of attending court. |
| “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.” | “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.” |
| Giving the fullest description of Janner’s health to date, Ozin told the high court that the former Leicester West MP had “virtually no language left at all” and that he was housebound and also had symptoms of Parkinson’s syndrome. | Giving the fullest description of Janner’s health to date, Ozin told the high court that the former Leicester West MP had “virtually no language left at all” and that he was housebound and also had symptoms of Parkinson’s syndrome. |
| A doctor who recently examined Janner said the peer became “angry and irritable” at the suggestion of attending court, shouting “No, no, no!” or “What? What? What?”. Bringing Janner before a court would be a breach of his human rights prohibiting torture, inhumane or degrading treatment, Ozin argued. | A doctor who recently examined Janner said the peer became “angry and irritable” at the suggestion of attending court, shouting “No, no, no!” or “What? What? What?”. Bringing Janner before a court would be a breach of his human rights prohibiting torture, inhumane or degrading treatment, Ozin argued. |
| But that argument was rejected as “simply unarguable” by Rafferty and Irwin. “There is no question of torture, or of inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment,” Rafferty said, handing down her judgment without hearing oral argument from the prosecution. | But that argument was rejected as “simply unarguable” by Rafferty and Irwin. “There is no question of torture, or of inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment,” Rafferty said, handing down her judgment without hearing oral argument from the prosecution. |
| Even if Janner was to suffer an adverse reaction from attending court it would be “very short-lived and, as a consequence of his condition, rapidly forgotten”, the judges said. | Even if Janner was to suffer an adverse reaction from attending court it would be “very short-lived and, as a consequence of his condition, rapidly forgotten”, the judges said. |
| The judges ruled that there was a strong public interest in requiring defendants to appear in court and that, if Janner’s appeal was successful, it would mean the most notorious, mentally ill suspects would not have to attend. | The judges ruled that there was a strong public interest in requiring defendants to appear in court and that, if Janner’s appeal was successful, it would mean the most notorious, mentally ill suspects would not have to attend. |