Wilful Neglect and Child Abuse - there may be a link?
Back in early 2015, PM Cameron, identified child sexual abuse as a 'national threat'. He was also calling for individual public service workers and their negligent bosses who are wilfully ignoring the evidence under their noses to be charged with 'wilful neglect'.
Dave said: “Professionals who fail to protect children will be held properly accountable and council bosses who preside over such catastrophic failure will not see rewards for that failure.”
The PM's strident posturing was brought about by the publication of a review into child abuse in Oxfordshire telling the now usual tale of institutional failings and wilful neglect. The press called for top managers to resign, just like Rotherham and Rochdale.
As usual Dave came across like a character from a Marvel comic, chest pumped out, primed for action and ready to legislate a new culture into this broken land.
The chances of anyone being charged with wilful neglect are remote because saying the words is easy, proving that someone was wilfully negligent in a court of law is a whole other game. Ask the Met' police, all you have to do is lose the paperwork.
And as far as new cultures are concerned, that was one of Dave's long term projects, like the 'greenest government ever' or cracking down on lobbying and tax dodgers, and re-writing the EU constitution or now, leaving the EU and staying in the single market.
Lost in CareBack in October 2012 MP Tom Watson said that police should investigate a “powerful paedophile network linked to parliament". This made the world wake from its slumbers for a brief moment. Dirty work had occurred and someone was covering it up.
But cover-ups and child sex abuse were not new. Take the suppressed Jillings report, from 1996 into abuse across North Wales and beyond. When the report surfaced (in 2013) it had been redacted into uselessness on the advice of local authority insurers, Municipal Mutual Insurance, who were worried about the cost of compensation claims arising from libel claims. Jillings had all sorts of hurdles put in his way by the police and councils in North Wales, so many in fact, it's a wonder that he managed to report anything.
In 1996, the then Secretary of State for Wales, William Hague, ordered the Waterhouse Inquiry into allegations of hundreds of cases of child abuse in care homes, mainly at the Bryn Estyn care home in Wrexham. The inquiry began in January 1997 and published its report, Lost In Care, in 2000. A number of guilty parties were named, some compensation was paid, and the usual recommendation for an overhaul of the care system were made.
Tory Manifesto Pledge: "We will protect children"April 2015, We will protect children. Every child deserves a warm, loving home, and to feel safe online and at school."
At the time that pledge was made three quarters of all child protection departments across the country were not fit for purpose, Ofsted said!.
Edward Timpson MP is the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Children & Families. Timpson is more shadow than man of substance, never seen or heard in public. However his responsibilities are boundless, they include: adoption, fostering and residential care home reform; child protection; special educational needs; family law and justice; children’s and young people’s services; school sport and more.
Timpson then must be responsible for the failure of child protection in England that Ofsted point to? This might explain why he prefers to keep his head down. And after revelations from Rochdale, Rotherham and Oxford, who can blame shadow man for moving under the radar like Jack Straw claimed he could. Jack was trying to impress a lobbying company that he would be worse his coin. Surely, the Tory manifesto would have much to say about addressing child protection failure throughout the land. Well, actually no. All it says is:
"We will continue to raise the quality of children’s social work, by expanding training programmes, such as Frontline, and creating new opportunities to develop the next generation of leaders in the field."Cared for Children
December 2015
Our great leader (Cameron) plans to save all children in care from the failings of local authority services. He told us:
"This will be one of the big landmark reforms of this Parliament, as transformative as what we did in education in the last".
Transformative is an interesting word, it makes an action seem grandiose, life-changing, radical, when in fact the changes being made are uninspiring and mediocre, based on a wing and prayer, social engineering being managed by alchemists.
Poorly performing children’s services will be told that they must improve within six months or be taken over by high-performing authorities, experts and charities. All very interesting but eleven months after the new trust took over Doncaster it was still deemed to be failing by Ofsted - perhaps Dave should bus in some more experts.
Edward Timpson MP is the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Children & Families is responsible for the failure of three-quarters of all child protection departments across the country that Ofsted says are not fit for purpose. Timpson appeared in an interview on Channel 4 in December and announced that he was proud of the fact that more children have been taken into care this year than ever before. We think he wandered into 'silly person' territory there.
The Waterhouse inquiry 1996, followed in the footsteps of Jillings and named hundreds of abusers, all care home workers or teachers. Waterhouse did not have a remit to pursue the network of high profile paedophiles who traffiked children from North Wales across the rest of the country. Waterhouse was there to suggest improvements to the care system and perhaps his efforts made a small difference, leastways 140 people received compensation for their abuse in 2000
In truth, Waterhouse's work was an abysmal failure and it's worth noting that Hague was less than astute in the matter. Specifically, he found no evidence for the existence of a paedophile ring extending beyond the care system, as had been rumoured. Fast forward - we now know there was a paedophile ring extending beyond the care system. We know that Waterhouse had the names of some very prominent paedophiles that he chose not to name, we know that police had evidence from years earlier, we know that the police had photographic evidence of the abuse. We know there was a cover up.
The current Home Secretary, Theresa May, said that "... we should look to make sure that the work that was done in relation to the Waterhouse inquiry did cover everything that it needed to cover." Typical, it wasn't that Waterhouse covered anything up, it was that he wasn't asked to cover enough? Perhaps there's a question here for William Hague who drew up the original inquiry's remit. For instance, it failed to consider allegations about children being taken out of the homes to be made available to abusers. The case of Steve Messham provides an unsavoury example of how children were moved around to abuse.
Steve Messham, who was abused for years at Bryn Estyn says his abusers included businessmen, members of the police and senior politicians, extending beyond the immediate area to London and beyond. It was Mr Messham who supplied the police with the photographic evidence, he also identified a senior Conservative figure from the Thatcher era as being involved in the abuse. But no one wanted to know.
Consider this, North Wales Police did investigate the care home abuse claims in 1991. Of eight prosecutions, seven former care workers were convicted but a report produced by Clwyd Council's own inquiry was never published because so much of its content was considered by lawyers to be defamatory, that is, the Council's insurance company did not want to foot the court costs.
This led to an investigation into the earlier investigations, as well as, the work of Waterhouse. It was announced that the National Crime Agency would be taking a hand as well, they wouldn't just inquire, they'd operate under the name of Operation Pallial. Upshot? They interviewed a lot of people about abuse, they arrested and prosecuted a few care workers but no businessmen, members of the police or senior politicians.
Twelve years after Waterhouse and another inquiry into abuse in North Wales was under way, perhaps this time it would have that wider network of paedo's in its sights. Then again not. Its remit was to make sure that the Waterhouse inquiry was carried out properly, whatever that means. BBC's Newsnight interviewed abuse victim Steve Messham who talked of the involvement of businessmen, members of the police and senior politicians in child abuse.
And will prosecutions result, will the guilty be named, will someone own up to the total failure of the care system in Wales since the year dot - yes, it really has been that long.
In Sum: A child gets abused or dies, politicians react, academics research, recommendations are made, new laws are passed, quangos are set up, practitioners absorb their new responsibilities and clueless inspectors inspect. What should happen, doesn't - another mystery.
And ‘Mr Cameron said: “These are very, very concerning allegations, they are dreadful allegations. We must get to the bottom of it as quickly as possible on behalf of the victims."
Don’t hold your breath, you’ll expire. They say that the Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse (IICSA) will be of the Hillsborough type. We think that means it will drag on for 26 years and the victims will eventually extract the truth like a rotten tooth, only to find the diseased root has been left in. Ah, but we wonder, would the cover-up merchants be able to find a patsy like David Duckenfield to take the rap for child sex abuse.
However, before you fall asleep, let me remind that your one time PM and first citizen of Chipping Norton once described the historic child sex abuse claims as a "conspiracy theory". Then he told us that child sex abuse was a 'national threat'. We are not sure if our chum from Chipping Norton was trying to confuse us, that is, we are not sure if he had yet made the link between Right Honourable buggers and Pakistani molesters.
Not a few MPs including Nick Clegg and former Liberal leader, David Steel, would like to forget the past or put otherwise, some people might be seeking to pretend they were not there when the pin-striped buggers were hopping in and out of bed with little boys down at the Elm Guest House, in Barnes, West London. No, not there at the Guest House but not sitting next to them in the House the morning after, having a little chit-chat with a bugger of small boys and pretending he wasn't a bugger. How appalling now, when journalists are asking them what they knew. It's worth noting how guilty our free press is of silence on the matter of high level child abuse, with all that phone hacking going on by newspapers, they must have known.
However, a journalist from the Exaro website tipped off MP Tom Watson that something rotten had gone on and a number of establishment figures were said to be involved. A character named 'Nick' was supplying the police with all the details. This prompted Watson to ask Dave at Prime Minister’s Question time what he thought about it all. Um, next we learn that Operation Fairbank is under way, a secret police investigation, this morphs into Operation Fernbridge, an open criminal investigation and then, Operation Midland is added to the mix.
We learnt that back in 1983, MP Geoffrey Dickens gave a dossier on the child abuses to then Home Secretary, Leon Brittan, Brittan gave it to someone else and they lost it. Who lost it? Was it the police, was it the Home Office, was it the cleaner - who knows?
Set up an inquiry
Simon Danczuk MP had been tracking the stench of Cyril Smith for some time and by 2014 he had connected him to the Elm Guest House. It was all too much for Dave, our leader, he told Home Secretary May to get an inquiry in place - that’s where he hit a brick wall. Mrs May seemed unable to choose an appropriate chair person for the inquiry. She called on Lady Butler-Sloss, no good, too close to the events of yesteryear, then she called on Fiona Woolf, no good, neighbours with the Brittans’. How far would the Home Secretary have to go, that is travel, to find an individual without any personal interest in this inquiry.
The failure to select an independent chair person can be explained variously. It may be all part of an establishment attempt to misdirect and manage outcomes, along the lines of most government inquiries, where two years and more are spent data churning, interviewing, scapegoating, report writing and then not implementing any of the of the recommendations that follow.
This intended inquiry is about more than ex-MPs and government ministers hiding in the shadows of the Carlton Club, it’s about institutional failure as well. The behaviour of the police, NHS, schools, social workers, children’s charities, politicians and local authorities towards victims who reported their abuse. However, the Home Office itself is right in the frame of this inquiry and indeed it was that department which ‘lost’ the Geoffrey Dicken’s dossier, that forced the government into this inquiry.
There’s only one certainty in all this, the victims of child sexual abuse are not happy with May and they do not trust this government to deliver a genuinely independent inquiry that brings the buggers face to face with their hideousness and hands out suitable punishment.
In December 2014, the Home Secretary wrote to all the members of the IICSA inquiry to inform them their services were nolonger required. She was considering setting up a full judicial inquiry?
In February 2015 Mrs May went 12,000 miles to find someone to head up her inquiry in to child sex abuse. She had now, hopefully, found someone untainted by the old boy establishment and friends of the Paedophile Information Exchange in the shape of New Zealand judge Lowell Goddard. Lowell says she is up for the challenge and has decided that she will not be publishing before 2018.
Worryingly, she started talking about learning from past mistakes. What was to learn. Surely the remit was to to discover who the child buggers were - name them all, the politicians, the civil servants, the policeman, the clierics, and the children's charities who ignored the cries for help.
Interestingly, Mrs May also said that the abuse inquiry would have access to MI5 files, adding:
"My intention is that the fullest possible access should be made to government papers in relation to these matters. Where there are files where there are certain issues around who can have access to those files we will need to ensure that we have an appropriate means of ensuring that the information is available to the inquiry panel.”
Just a moment. Was it not MI5 who told Lancashire Special Branch detective Tony Robinson to forget about Cyril Smith and send them all the evidence of Smith’s abuse in Rochdale. After this a police investigation into Smith’s abuse activity in London was scrapped. Smith was arrested, the police had video evidence, this implicated Smith and a senior member of the intelligence agencies.
We also know that MI5 and the police threatened abuse victims and whistleblowers. They were warned not to talk, they were told they would fall foul of the Official Secrets Act and in the case of whistleblowers, their pensions were at stake. Don Hale, investigative journalist gave the police evidence on Smith and Leon Brittain and was personally threatened by Smith. How did Smith know that Hale was the source of the evidence, unless the police had told him.
The point of the Wanless Review may be lost on many people but perhaps he might like to consider a review into how the NSPCC responded to child sex abuse victims of the Westminster buggers between 1979 and 1999? It is almost as if someone is trying to persuade the historic child sex abuse inquiry, that there’s no point in focussing on the Home Office because they do not know anything.
Back in 2013, the Home Office commissioned a review into how it handled abuse allegations between 1979 and 1999. There was also a question over some missing paper work. The missing documents came from Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens in the 1980s detailing the activities involving the sexual abuse of children by prominent public figures. A "dossier" was handed to Leon Brittain in 1984, when he was home secretary, about alleged paedophile abuse in Westminster in the 1980s. Brittain passed the dossier onto the Home Office and they lost it.
Quite what the Home Office was reviewing is uncertain since all the documents relating to sex abuse had been ‘lost or destroyed’.
Was the Home Office covering up? Mrs May told MPs: "I cannot stand here and say the Home Office was not involved in a cover-up in the 1980s and that is why I am determined to get to the truth of this.” In an effort to get to the truth she set up the Wanless Review. Upshot? Nothing, Wanless didn’t find the missing Dickens dossier. Wanless moved on and asked MI5 if they wouldn’t mind having a look and they said they couldn’t find anything relevant. We do hope it wasn’t too much trouble for them.
Readers note: Peter Wanless is the NSPCC Chief Executive
There was a fly in the ointment for Mrs May and her expert inquiry team, MI5 do not have any files relating to paedophile activity among politicians, police offices and MI5 agents.
However, Lowell Goddard lasted until October 2016 and it is now clear she thought it good enough to learn from past mistakes and was not interested in bringing anyone to book. She was paid £80,000 get lost money, euphemistically termed severance pay. She received wages of £360,000 from April 2015 to August 2016 and took 44 days off to work in NZ and Aus’, in addition to her 30 days of annual holiday leave.
New Home Secretary Amber Rudd thanked Goddard for her efforts: “It is testament to your commitment that you have taken the difficult decision to stand down having set the inquiry firmly on course, and allow someone else to lead it through to the end. With regret I agree that this is the right decision.” No one can accuse Rudd of not having a sense of humour. Lowell Goddard walked away from inquiry because she could not cope with its scale:
Strands of the inquiry
Accountability and Reparations
Cambridge House, Knowl View and Rochdale
Children in custodial institutions
Children outside the UK
Child sexual exploitation by organised networks
Lambeth Council
Lord Janner
Nottinghamshire Councils
Residential schools
The Anglican Church
The internet
The Roman Catholic Church
Westminster
Summary: On the 7th July, 2014 the government set up an inquiry into the way public bodies investigated and handled child sex abuse claims. Baroness Butler-Sloss was chosen to chair the inquiry. Butler-Sloss lasted seven days before standing down. Lord Mayor of London Fiona Woolf took up the chair. She lasted until October 2014. Home Secretary Therasa May closed down the inquiry and reestablished it with New Zealand high court judge Dame Lowell Goddard in charge but she had a problem putting in a full week. She too stood down in August 2016. Professor Alexis Jay, who led the Rotherham abuse inquiry, was appointed the new chairwoman. The inquiry hit the buffers, lawyers started to resign and survivor groups let it be known they were unhappy with Jay. Shirley Oaks Survivors Association pulled out in November 2016. December: Every former resident of the Shirley Oaks network of children's homes in south London is to receive compensation for being at risk of abuse dating back decades. Lambeth Council is set to pay tens of millions of pounds to people whether or not they were abused at Shirley Oaks.
Professor Alexis Jay takes over August 2016
The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse in England and Wales the inquiry examining how the country's institutions handled their duty of care to protect children from sexual abuse. It was set up on 7 July 2014, produced its 19th and final report on 20 October 2022. Those eight years saw thousands of witnesses to abuse and assault in institutional settings. The list of recommendations to correct the existing barbaric system this time is literally longer than your arm – and will it change anything?
Operation Midland, full report published Oct.2019
A List of child abuse inquires and investigations
Operation Fairbank, an umbrella inquiry, covering Op' Fernbridge, Op' Athabasca, Op' Midland, Op' Cayacos. All these inquiries are being run by the Met Police, in cooperation with Manchester Police, focussing on the likes of Cyril Smith at the Elm Guest House and Dolphin Square, Grafton Close Children's Home, as well as, the Paedophile Information Exchange.
In Northern Ireland they have an inquiry to look at systemic failings by institutions or the state in their duties towards children in their care between 1922-95. This is also focussing on Kincora Boys' home. The Scottish government have their own public inquiry looking at child abuse within institutions run by the Roman Catholic church. We can only wonder why this inquiry stops at 1995, is child abuse nolonger a problem across the water?
Wales has the Pallial Inquiry ongoing and they have appointed a judge to revisit the 2000 Waterhouse Inquiry, which seems to have missed a thing or two.
Operation Yewtree, which is sort of a celebrity investigation, so far they have nabbed a number of individuals, including Max Clifford, Rolf Harris and Dave Lee Travis and Stuart Hall, and of course, the now dead but once untouchable beast, Savile. Public revelations over Savile's behaviour sparked a flurry of investigations by every institution that was tainted by Savile, while they looked the other way.
In September (2014) Association of Chief Police Officers set up an information gathering operation, Operation Hydrant, from police forces across the country exploring the links to elected officials and institutions such as hospitals, schools, children's homes, care homes and parliament and child sex abuse. The data gathering has now been done but the man in charge said the numbers showed only a "snapshot in time". He also said: “We are seeing an unprecedented increase in the number of reports that are coming forward".There is no doubt (Jimmy) Savile has had an effect on us. We are dealing with more and more allegations.” He expects more than 100,000 by the year's end.
Chief Constable Simon Bailey, chair of the group, told the briefing that out of 1,433 alleged offenders identified nationwide, 76 were politicians, 43 were from the music industry, seven were from sport and 135 were from the TV, film or radio industries. Some 216 are now dead.
It would be nice to hear what the man on the Clapham Omnibus made of all these reviews, inquiries, and investigations, and to know whether that man was able to disentangle the announcement that the Independent Police Complaints Commission is to investigate how three police forces dealt with information about paedophiles supplied by Canadian police.
This investigation is about to happen because the Essex, North Wales and North Yorkshire police did not deal in a timely or urgent manner with the information supplied. And our own version of the FBI, the National Crime Agency have already apologised for their sloth.
The IPCC says it takes the abuse of children seriously, that’s reassuring. However, this investigation has nothing to do with historic child sex abuse by establishment figures. We already know that the police have an appalling track record in sex abuse cases. The IPCC action is apparently driven by “considerable public concern about how the police deal with sexual offences involving children”.
The man on the omnibus may well conclude that there is a connection between Wanless and this investigation, both are designed to reassure the public that something is being done - straight from the first page of the Cynics Handbook, ‘being seen to be doing something’ may be confused with purposeful action and is therefore highly desirable.
The police watchdog was also set to investigate whether detectives covered up child abuse involving senior police and politicians as recently as 2005. This new investigation will cover the period 1970s to the 2000s.
The investigation was set up following allegations that police suppressed evidence, covered up the involvement of politicians, and hindered or stopped investigations. These claims were referred to the IPCC by the Metropolitan Police's Directorate of Professional Standards. Let us not get confused, the IPCC will be investigating police corruption. The Met will carry on with its attempts to track down the paedophiles.
Cyril Smith: Unfinished business
During any government regime the ghosts and misdeeds of the past may come back to haunt the present. The cover up by the establishment for decades of Cyril Smith's disgusting molestation of small children may superficially have nothing to do with Mr Cameron and his government. However, when we learn that the Cabinet Office blocked FoI requests for information concerning who put Smith forward for a knighthood, we may wonder why? Eventually they gave up the name, it was David Steel.
Newspaper men managed to track down Steel to the hobbit hole where he now lives, from there he described Smith's nastiness as 'ancient' and after all Smith was in the Labour Party when he was busy disciplining young boys in Rochdale, so his activities had nothing to do with the LibDems. Steel still had his 1979 copy of Private Eye and had even re-read it for his interview. That is it, that is as proactive as he was prepared to be - all too much trouble for an ageing hobbit?
We suggest that Steel broadens his reading to include a publication from 2014, i.e. Smile For The Camera: The Double Life of Cyril Smith by Simon Danczuk and Matthew Baker. And something for Steel to think about, use of the word ancient, to chase away demons from the past will not wash; we may not be able to easily find the bodies but we can still smell the stench of wrong doing.
The thing about Liberals and public school types in general is that they do not see much wrong with a bit of spanking. Least ways this was how Liberal leader David Steel viewed the handy work of paedophile Cyril Smith, yes, Mr Clean laughed off the vile behaviour of Smith. Many knew Smith was a nasty piece of work, a beast who would be most comfortable in Jimmy Savile's mobile home and yet they all turned a blind eye, the police had enough evidence to arrest Smith but all the evidence was hidden from the public gaze.
Interestingly, none of the national newspapers ever wrote about Smith creeping around the corridors of boys homes in the dark. Someone high up the food chain was covering up for Smith, perhaps that someone was part of the same paedo' gang. Towards the end of 2014 we learnt that at least two newspaper were threatened with D-notices over printing anything about paedophile rings among the establishment. The people responsible for issuing D-notices tell us today that they have no evidence that this action was taken to prevent the publication of revelations.
Nick Clegg, Lib-Dem leader and deputy Prime Minister, told us in 2012, after Smith's behaviour 'officially' came out of the shadows: "I am deeply shocked and horrified by these terrible allegations and my thoughts are with the victims who had the courage to speak out." That was the same Nick Clegg who led the cheer leading for Smith when he left politics, telling the world what a marvellous chap he was and what a great contribution he made to the party. More recently Clegg was at pains to distance himself from the taint of Smith, claiming it was all so long ago for him to know anything. Some critics pointed out that he would have had more credence as a leader if he declared an intention to launch a party led inquiry, and root out and name anyone who covered up for Smith. No, not Nick, he just wanted to forget the whole thing.
Cut through all the agonising, and empty expressions like "this must never be allowed to happen again", and children continue to be abused and mistreated. Those agencies with a remit and an ambition to protect children have failed.
Everyone knew about Jimmy Savile, least ways they heard rumours and yet no one spoke out. The few victims who did were ignored or punished by the child protectors, the unwitting facilitators of Savile's abuse. Savile died in 2011 and the BBC were set to run tribute shows over the Christmas period. At the same time, Newsnight were set to air an expose of Savile's abuse, mysteriously this was dropped from the schedule, the tributes were not. The man in charge of Vision at the BBC, then director general, George Entwistle, was told about the Newsnight story but never bothered to ask what it was that Newsnight had to tell. He claimed he didn't ask because he didn't want to interfere, the decision to pull the piece was made by Newsnight editor Peter Rippon. Pressed at an inquiry to explain his lack of interest, Entwistle responded "It was a determination not to show an undue interest”.
It was people without undue interest, people without curiosity who allowed Savile to ply his sick trade at the BBC for fifty years. But with over 200 victims of Savile's abuse coming forward, all the safeguarders have displayed a suitably panicked curiosity. Chris Grayling, Justice Secretary told us:
“I hope every single person in the law enforcement world today are accepting the fact that things were badly wrong,” he said. “It should never happen again.”
Lord Janner: "I don't believe it!"Back in April 2015, the DPP told us that Lord Janner was too demented to mount a defence against those who accuse him of sexual abuse, going back decades. Janner's old MP chums and lords a leaping don't believe that Janner, the jolly good egg, could have engaged in child buggery. Ed Miliband says he was shocked to hear of the allegations. We wonder whether he was more or less shocked than Nick Clegg, when he found out, belatedly, about the disgusting Cyril Smith.
However, we also learnt that former DPP, Lord MacDonald, was not told in 2007 that a case against Janner had been dropped by 'local' CPS people. Unbelievable, the idea that some 'locals' would take it upon themselves to drop a high profile case without telling the guy in charge? But be reassured, he told us:
"If it had been referred to me, I would certainly have given it my close and robust personal attention."
Janner should have been arrested at least three times over the past 30 years. The police had enough evidence but the man never came before the courts. Why wasn't Janner pursued, who were the senior police figures who told their troops to drop the Janner cases? Ah but, it's foolish to ask such questions, when we have a prime minister in David Cameron, who believes that 'we can't know anything because there's nothing to know'. By which he means because all the evidence keeps going missing.
We do know that the police were just about to pounce on Janner when Alison Saunders, currently heading up the CPS, pulled the plug, due to Janner's mental state - "not in the public interest", she said. We think that's political speak for 'the public don't need to know'.
We could ask 'What about the victims' interests'. How will they be served having been denied their day in court? Saunders has the answer, they can tell the Historic Child Sex Abuse Panel all they know, which will gain them the sum of nothing.
Alternatively, if they want some retribution, they can sue Janner for his pension and tough luck if he's too demented to turn up.
Readers' Note: The Attorney General, Jeremy Wright, has oversight for the CPS and can if he chooses, decide to prosecute?
Janner update, August 2015: Janner was threatened with arrest unless he turned up in court, so he did, saying as he entered the courtroom "It's very nice, isn't it? Janner died in December 2015.