Tony Greenstein | 20 April 2015 | Post Views:

Greville ‘Grovel’ Janner – Protected by his LFI, CST & Zionist Colleagues

Tony Greenstein
I have no way of knowing whether ‘Grovel’ Janner is guilty of the accusations of child abuse, including child rape.  What I do know is that these are extremely serious allegations and merit imprisonment for life if the person is found guilty.  
Accused of 22 offences against children – protected by DPP Alison Saunders & the Establishment

What I also know is that prominent members of the Establishment – such as Ed Balls MP and John Mann MP – chose to work with him in Labour Friends of Israel and the so-called Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-Semitism, despite knowing of the accusations and that Keith Vaz MP, Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, sought to change the laws on contempt so that ‘honourable’ rapists and child abusers could no longer be outed.
Janner was a right-wing Labour MP and kept the company of Tories
I also know that it is perfectly possible for someone accused of serious offences to be prosecuted.  Someone accused of unlawfully killing another person can be tried and found guilty but with a partial defence of diminished responsibility.  Of course, at the time Grovel was alleged to have perpetrated these offences there was no suggestion he was suffering from dementia.  But he now is and that is preventing his prosecution rather than being taken into account at the sentencing state (if found guilty).
Former Chief of Staff, Field Marshall Lord Bramall (left) is the only person to come out of this with credit.  He thwacked ‘Grovel’ round the head for his defence of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon
Clearly with 22 alleged offences committed against 9 separate children there is a huge amount of evidence that Grovel committed the offences.  But that should be for a Judge and Jury to decide, not for Alison Saunders, the DPP, who should be dismissed for perpetuating the cover-up of Janner’s alleged offences.
Greville Janner is known to readers of Private Eye as Grovel Janner, a suitable
epithet for a man who I only encountered on two occasions.  Oily and slimy, he entirely merited
comparison with Uriah Heep.
‘Grovel’ in more confident times

The Zionist institutions that Janner bestowed his favours on need to come
clean and apologise to his victims.  I
realise that they spend much of their time defending Israel right or wrong,
including Israel’s abuse of Palestinian children (beatings, torture, rape,
sexual abuse, shackling)

The hypocrite uses the Holocaust to hide behind

Janner was an office holder with a number of Zionist organisations.  Vice President of The Association for Jewish Youth and the The
Jewish Leadership Council, which represents Zionist capitalists.  He was President of The Association of Jewish
Ex-Servicemen and Women.

‘Grovel’ Janner was ably supported by other MPs like Keith Vaz

He was also on the Advisory Board of the Zionist vigilante group and
erstwhile ‘charity’ the Community Security Trust, which includes in its remit
the protection of Jewish children from anti-Semitic attacks.  Perhaps the Community Security Trust will
extend this to protecting children, including Jewish children, from sexual
abusers and rapists?

Grovel’s dementia didn’t prevent him staying on at the Lords

Janner was also Vice President of The World Jewish Congress, another Zionist
body, Chairman of The Holocaust Educational Trust and Director of The United
Jewish Israel Appeal, which raises funds in order that the Israeli state can
continue to abuse and murder Palestinians, including children.

Grovel as an MP delivering petition with child
The first occasion I met him was when giving evidence to the
Parliamentary Committee on Employment of which he was Chairman from 1992-96.  I had been asked to give evidence as
Secretary of  Brighton Unemployed
Centre.  He told me, after having
ascertained I held an MA in Imperial History. that I was the best qualified
unemployed person he had met, which probably showed the limits of his
engagement with the real world.  The
other time we met was leafleting a Labour Party/Labour Friends of Israel meeting
when he considered a minor offence of shoplifting of great import.  I guess that offences against property were
considered more heinous to this son of the British establishment than offences
against children. 
Apart from being Chairman of the Board of Deputies of British
Jews (1978-84), a thoroughly pro-Zionist organisation which did its best to
undermine the fight against fascism in the ‘30’s in the Jewish community.  It represents the Jewish petit-bourgeoisie
and a section of the Jewish establishment.
Janner also founded the Holocaust Educational Trust.  The Holocaust is a good excuse to demonise
the Palestinians whilst making yourself feel good.  A QC since 1971, he was a Labour MP from
1970 to 1997; since then he has been a member of the House of Lords.
Grovel was made a life peer as Baron Janner of Braunstone in
1997. He is President of John Mann MP and Dennis MacShane’s All-Party
Parliamentary Group against Anti-Semitism, and chairs the All-Party
Britain-Israel Parliamentary Group.  It’s
not surprising that these parliamentary cretins didn’t notice his dementia but
then again, since  his diagnosis is
rather convenient, perhaps that is understandable.
A man who worked in Janner’s office during 1991, soon after
graduating from university, said: “It was
a matter of office gossip that he liked boys, or young men in their mid-20s. He
would have friendships with bright young men, and would go swimming with them
in his club. He would go for a swim, then have breakfast, then work. Then after
lunch he would lie out on the sofa in his constituency office.”
He was still an active peer for several years after his ‘Alzheimer’
was first diagnosed in 2009. He made his last speech – fittingly on Israel and
Palestine – in February 2013. The register shows that he was a regular attender
in the Lords until the end of December 2013.

Greville Janner: How MPs rallied to defence of Labour peer ‘unfairly put through hell by a wicked slur’ Independent 16.4.15. 

Labour Friends of Israel – like most pro-Israel groups – has often tried to
discredit criticism of Israel by conflating it with ‘anti-Semitism’. Janner, who was an LFI vice-chair, talked of the ‘viciously and often notoriously
anti-Israel” left liberal media
.’ Rabbi David Goldberg, “Let’s have a sense of proportion”, The Guardian,
26.1. 02

Balls & Janner

The disgusting Ed
Balls who consorted with Janner now seeks to distance the Labour Party from
this creature – Balls is thoroughly pro-Zionist and has never spoken out
against the abuse of Palestinian children by Israel

Clegg washing his
hands of his Zionist colleague.  With the
Lib Dems having to answer questions about Cyril Smith MP for whom they covered
it must all be embarrassing

Rt Hon Anne McGuire MP, LFI chair
Michael Dugher MP
Louise Ellman MP
Michael McCann MP
Rachel Reeves MP
Jonathan Reynolds MP
Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale

was the son of Sir Barnett Janner, former Chairman of the Zionist Federation of
Great Britain. Another pillar of the Jewish Establishment and Liberal MP for Leicester
North West which he inherited.  He was a
member of the notorious Blairite LFI, whose supporters

Balls MP
Berger MP
Hon Hazel Blears MP
Hon David Blunkett MP
Hon Liam Byrne MP
Cooper MP
Fitzpatrick MP
Hon Caroline Flint MP
Gardiner MP
Glindon MP
Gwynne MP
Hamilton MP
Harris MP
Hon Margaret Hodge MP
Hodgson MP
Lewis MP
Hon Anne McGuire MP
Munn MP
Hon Jim Murphy MP
Hon John Spellar MP
Umunna MP
Watts MP
Woodcock MP
Hon Shaun Woodward MP
Hon Lord Anderson of Swansea
Beecham DL
Clarke of Hampstead CBE
Hon Lord Clinton-Davis
Davies of Coity CBE
Hon Lord Foster of Bishop Auckland
Hon Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
Baroness Hayter
Janner of Braunstone QC
A veritable rogues gallery of the Parliamentary Labour
Party.  Only Dennis MacShane, the former
MP for Rotherham, has been removed.  No
doubt on account his time spent as a guest of Her Majesty.
of Grovel’s few subsequent forays into the public eye came in 2002, when Uri
Geller, a friend, arranged for him to accompany Michael Jackson on a tour of
Parliament. The trio dropped in on a party for Labour MP Paul Boateng, where
Jackson agreed to sing happy birthday. 
Boateng himself is rumoured to have been shunted off as High
Commissioner to South Africa because of child abuse allegations.  See
In September, the Chief Constable of
Derbyshire, Mick Creedon, was reported as saying his 1989 inquiries as a detective
sergeant into ‘credible evidence’ of child abuse by Janner were blocked by
superiors.  see  
Janner had been named in open court
as an abuser during the 1991 trial of Leicester children’s home manager Frank
Beck. MPs, including the current chair of the Commons Home Affairs Committee,
Keith Vaz, rallied around Janner following trial reports. In December 1991 some
called for a review of the law of contempt following what fellow Leicester MP
Vaz called a ‘cowardly attack’ on Janner’s character. In 1991 Alex Carlisle QC,
a Liberal-Democrat was one of the MPs supporting Greville Janner following the Beck
trial. Hansard records him saying of Janner: ‘He is a man of determination and enthusiasm whose integrity and will
power have crossed party lines
.’  see and
Another defender of Janner was
ex-left and New Labour Minister Chris Mullins.
Attorney General’s Office
Victoria Street
19 April, 2015
Dear Attorney General
Reference: CPS decision on Lord Janner of
I write in my capacity as a potential
Member of Parliament to challenge the decision of the DPP, Alison Saunders, not
to prosecute Lord Janner for alleged crimes, namely 16 indecent assaults
between 1969 and 1988, and 6 counts of buggery on under aged boys between 1972
and 1988.
I have read the CPS’ justification for
their decision here
Please do not refer this letter downwards
to the CPS, and please do not treat it as a complaint against the CPS. I have
been in lengthy correspondence with the CPS and have used their complaint
service already, and I have no confidence in their decisions and processes, for
the reasons set out below. I wish to challenge the judgment of the DPP directly.
This is now a matter for the Chief Law Officer.
Alison Saunders in her justification
document accepts that the evidential basis for a criminal prosecution of Janner
is sound. However, she argues that there is no public interest in prosecuting
him because he is unfit to plead.
She bases this argument on the evidence of
four medical experts who agree that he has dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease,
and that they have  “general agreement” as to the level of cognitive
ability on a Mini  Mental State examination.
However, there is no reference to any brain
scan having been carried our. If scans were performed but reports on the scans
were left out of the CPS justification document, there has been a failure of
due diligence in reporting, and Saunders should be rebuked.
If on the other hand brain scans on Janner
were not performed, there has been serious negligence. In my extensive
correspondence with the CPS on this case I explicitly requested several times
that brain scans should be carried out, because they give objective evidence
that goes far beyond medical history taking and examination. If they were not
carried out Saunders should be invited to consider her position.
If we accept for the sake of argument that
Janner is indeed suffering from Alzheimer’s disease, there are three precedents
where paedophiles have been tried and convicted of sexual crimes against
children. The names are David Massingham, John Hayford and Michael Collingwood.
I can supply references if requested, but the CPS should be able to find them.
Either Alison Saunders knew of these cases
and negligently failed to deal with them in her report, or she did not know of
them, in which case there was a failure of due diligence as a lawyer.
There is no provision in the CPS Code of
Practice to exempt people with dementia from facing trial. In the absence of
such provision, but in the presence of sufficient evidential basis to proceed,
Alison Saunders has used the public interest test.
Now clearly there is a major public
interest in bringing to court people who are abused of serious sexual crimes
against children, especially children who for one reason or another were in the
care of public organisations.
First, sexual abuse has a devastating
effect on the subsequent lives of survivors of abuse, and there is a need to
demonstrate that society will not tolerate child abuse, even if carried out by
Second, the Law itself comes into disrepute
if there is a public perception that VIP status confers immunity against
justice. You must be aware that already there exists a common perception that
this is the case. This view is particularly prevalent in the community of
survivors of sexual abuse. If Janner escapes trial, this perception will
increase, both among survivors and among the general public. It is not in the
public interest for there to be a perception that there is one law for the
rich, another for the poor.
Against these two major public interest
arguments, the CPS advances the minor public interest argument that money spent
in bringing Janner to court could be wasted as he is likely to be judged unfit
to plead. This argument is extremely weak. The expenditure would be trivial in
comparison with other cases that have failed.
The precedents referred to above are worthy
of being considered in court.
importantly, a major legal argument needs to be entertained, namely whether a
person who passes the evidential test but who might not be fit to plead for
reasons of dementia should be tried as if in absentia.
defence could test the evidence given by Janner’s alleged victims. His accusers
could be invited to ask if they can positively identify him, possibly by
reference to body characteristics such as moles.
should be noted also that in coming to her conclusion, Saunders rejected advice
of one of UK’s principal authorities on sex offences. Eleanor Laws QC, leading
counsel to Leicestershire police’s investigation into Janner, recommended that
he be put on trial despite his age and dementia.
In the light of this, the DPP must have
consulted with other people in coming to her decision. The names of these
people, the advice they gave, and the degree of pressure that they put on the
DPP should be made clear to the public.
In conclusion, let me summarise the
questions I am raising:
1. The
question of whether or not scans have been carried out must be settled.
2. The
question of precedents must be considered.
3. The
question of public interest, major and minor, needs to be reviewed.
4. Who
gave advice to the DPP to persuade her to come to her conclusion?
I look forward to a timely response to all
the points made in this letter.
Respectfully yours
Dr Richard Lawson
Parliamentary Candidate, Weston
Constituency, Green Party
Perhaps the person who comes out best in all of this is one Field
Marshal Lord Bramall.  After an argument
over the Lebanon conflict, he thwacked his fellow peer, the 78-year-old Lord

Posted in

Tony Greenstein

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.