Why the children of Greville Janner believe he must be innocent of 33 child sex abuse allegations

lord janner

Lord Janner Image courtesy BBC


Earlier this blog ran a piece highlighting why  I believed on the basis of current investigations and recent inquiries that Daniel Janner must be wrong to say that all the cases of alleged child sex abuse against his father, Greville, are fabricated.

I sent him the blog. He came back to me to put his case and released some documents including one sent to the child sexual abuse inquiry. He did not put me under any pressure to write anything else.

In the interests of transparency and fairness I think it worth reporting what the family think. Daniel Janner tells me his views reflect the views of his sisters,Marion and  Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner. I am not saying I agree with them but I am saying that if and when the cases are examined by Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse they have to be handled with care. The inquiry will have to ask  searching questions as to why they were not raised all that time ago.


Daniel Janner QC Pic credit: http://www.regulatorycriminallawyers.co.uk

Daniel Janner points out that the original allegations against his father were raised by the notorious paedophile Frank Beck  during his trial. As the excellent book I reviewed earlier, Abuse of Trust, reveals Beck was a sadistic, manipulative character who conned a weakly run Leicestershire social services department and the local Liberal Party into believing he had a magic touch in dealing with seriously disturbed children. Therefore he would and could manipulate  survivors at the time.

Daniel Janner’s case is that during the original  police investigation into Beck his father’s name was never mentioned despite 400 people being interviewed ( it was the first serious police investigation into child sex abuse). He also has a statement from a convicted burglar who shared a cell with Beck who says Beck planned to  falsely drag Greville Janner into the allegations against him before he stood trial.

He is particularly disparaging of  the claims of one of the survivors – who also made allegations against Janner  at the time- and points out discrepancies into the claims  made by other survivors. In one case, he produced a copy of his father’s passport to show that he was in Australia when an alleged offence took place. In another case in Scotland he says his visit was much shorter than alleged.

He also says as he had the power of attorney for his father, who had Alzeheimers before he died, he has reviewed all the evidence supplied by the Crown Prosecution Service  for the trial that was abandoned against him and in his view none of it stood up. When pressed to explain why there are 33 people making allegations his father, he says a number  of them are a conspiracy which has become a bandwagon aimed to claim money against his father’s estate.

There are at least six claimants – according to  the document submitted by his solicitors  to the inquiry – claiming compensation from the estate.

He wants them to face a civil trial where ” the Estate will be able to examine the claimant’s overall credibility, the consistency of the allegations,the reasons for the delay in bringing the claims and the authenticity of any psychiatric symptoms that are now alleged to have been caused by the abuse.”

“The Estate will also be able to explore the effect of the delay on the evidence, in particular the absence of any earlier accounts by the claimants, the effect of missing witnesses and documents and the effect on memories of the passage of time.”

He says none of this will be possible in the inquiry which could then issue a finding of fact against Janner and the letter to the inquiry from his solicitor says: ” factual findings…will prejudice the Estate’s position in any civil claims, which would be unjust.”

His family’s decision not to become ” a core participant ” in the inquiry – someone entitled to all the documents and to mount a response- does place the inquiry in difficulty.

But he is also taking a risk in the civil court. A criminal court would have acquitted Janner if there had been any  reasonable doubt about the evidence against him. A civil court will have to decide on the ” balance of probabilities” which is a lesser level of proof.

They also have a position where the Criminal Prosecution Services decided there was a case to answer and  the original police investigation which found no evidence is now under investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. None of those points are in Janner’s favour.

That is why  for both the family’s sake and the survivors’ sake in my view  there needs to be a thorough investigation.











12 thoughts on “Why the children of Greville Janner believe he must be innocent of 33 child sex abuse allegations

  1. David
    It is so important to examine these historic sex abuse cases carefully, both to protect the reputation of innocent men and to go over the lessons learned where they were not innocent, as in the case of my father, Victor Montagu MP.
    Like Greville Janner, my father was in many ways a fine man and did many useful things in politics; however he was also a serial paedophile who interfered with many boys’ lives, including my own. The important thing is that he was not stopped when it would have been possible to do so, and this may or may not be the same with Daniel’s father. There was an opportunity in 1960 when my mother and family doctor knew of my abuse in detail, and did nothing. There was an opportunity in 1962 when police started an investigation connected with a different child, but they were advised not to proceed by the DPP.
    We must learn the lessons – which is that Britain must introduce mandatory reporting law for all adults that know of child sex abuse, wherever it is taking place. I shall be talking about this need at the Gibraltar Literary Festival in a few days’ time in reviewing my book ‘A Humour of Love’. I hope I shall be sharing the platform with others who take this view.
    Robert Montagu


  2. If the Inquiry is (very properly) considering issues such as the inadequacy of the police investigation of the allegations identified by Henriques, would a civil trial that attempted to pre-empt its findings be able to get very far?


    • Good question. I think it might be more difficult to get a civil case off the ground- though the main aim seems to be delay the inquiry looking at Janner until after the civil case or only as part of a failure of institutional care.


  3. I think you are more than generous in writing this article David. It is not as if the Janner family had not received considerable “airtime” from mainstream media. If I have any sympathy for the family it is that the late Lord Janner stands alone now amongst the political elite in not being “vindicated” by the persistent efforts of the press and other media. They have cleared so many people who have outstanding allegations against them it is laughable.
    I do not know the motivations of the thirty plus who allege abuse at Lord Janners hands, but it seems beyond belief that they are all fanaticists, gold diggers or simply deluded. I have seen a list of the charges that would have been raised against him and it is not pretty to put it mildly.
    I also have seen the claims of Gavin Littaur,
    a family friend, who would appear to have none of the above motivations to traduce Lord Janner but insists he was propositioned.
    My fear of a Civil Court is that it is all in the hands of a judge. Back before the establishment that has kept him from public examination for so long. That he has not faced his accusers before is not for lack of accusation rather for lack of will to proceed.
    I suspect the evidence in this case, if allowed free and full exposure will prove overwhelming. Personally I hope it goes to the enquiry, but I very much doubt it will.
    The response of the Janner family seems to me a co-ordinated tactical manouvre to make this go away. I cannot find much to admire in that given the horrific nature of the allegations and my belief that they cannot all be inventions. But it is there dad who may well have hidden this from them.


    • Colin – My view is that there appears to be a case to answer. However having said that in a previous blog I only thought it fair as he did respond to me that I should also report what he said on my own blog – so there is a whole picture.


      • David.
        I understand your position and reasoning and applaud your sense of fair play. I guess I am prejudiced by the complete lack of balance in the mainstream media who turn out a constant stream of propaganda aimed at discrediting the whole process. Pronouncing people as innocent when in some cases inquiries are on-going and in others when the decision was insufficient evidence to proceed.
        Where are the bastions of fair play when this is going on? Where’s the balance? There is none. Rather they queue up to shoot the messengers and slur the Met and others who stand in their way. Have you noticed how Theresa May is their latest target?
        Just hope for once the truth wins but I doubt it will.


      • I agree with you about the coverage in mainstream media – which switched from publishing lurid allegations to suddenly saying it is all untrue. There is definitely some agenda there. As a result I did have second thoughts about putting this blog up- since it might reflect the overwhelming coverage elsewhere. But then thought it was only fair to do so – but it doesn’t mean that I have changed my mind that there is something to expose here. I was interested in the case you mentioned which falls into line with survivors I have met who are not interested in the money but only in getting someone to believe them that this really happened.


  4. With all due respect, like you I have NO idea if innocent or guilty BUT 1. The word Paedophile Ring is for a reason. 2. It is notoriously difficult to get a conviction never mind actually being “believed” by the police and social services. 3. Not all evil people stand out as evil. They hide it well behind campaigns to help, entertain, fund raise for children. 4. Being seen to be “kind to kids and grannies” ALWAYS plays well with society it dumbs their thoughts. As for why SO LONG to report, these allegations went before many so called protectors time and time again. The Enquiries and cases were closed down. 5. If Joe Bloggs abuses kids, make NO mistake it is as prevalent from the very top of this country. 6. Sex and the ability to speak to adults was extremely difficult back then. We had so called free Love of the 60s and 70s but children with NO RIGHTS, NO VOICE, NO HOPE. Children were considered shameful for reporting CSA. It is in the establishments interest to COVER UP. It would bring down governments and worse, I believe.

    33 MEN that’s a class size of children now adults.. Liars? Personally I doubt it.

    And in my many chats with survivors MONEY does not come into it, JUSTICE AND TRUTH DO. No amount of money can EVER take away dumb down or erase memories NO CHILD SHOULD EVER HAVE TO CARRY.

    It is cruel that bit by bit his country is using all means possible to kill an enquiry,,make no mistake. These stories will be told.

    It is up to the press whether they choose to claim infamy and pay rises, by either colluding with their powerful press baron bosses. Or risk ridicule but a clear conscience and total respect of these whom being believed is like cutting coal with a plastic teaspoon.

    33 children – a classroom full. Many of whom did not know, nor associate with each other. The sickness isn’t the abused, the sickness belongs to whichever government is in power and chooses to ignore.

    Best wishes


    Ps sorry I didn’t have the chance of a private never mind a decent education, I was busy trying to stay alive, so not the most eloquent e mail.

    Sent from my iPad


  5. I am 100% with the family of he late Lord Janner if there is an attempt by any body including a statutory Inquiry, Parliamentary committee, national news media to attempt to make a judgement whie any from of judicial process is pending. This is a basic rule of law.


  6. Pingback: The cheapskate botched and useless investigations into child sexual abuse by Leicestershire Police that led to no timely prosecution of Greville Janner | Westminster Confidential

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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

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