Latest

Home Office Have Lost The Lord Janner Sex Abuse File

Janner sex abuse file

I suppose it will come as little, or no surprise to learn that the file on Labour peer, Lord Janner is among 114 dossiers on child sex abuse that have gone missing from the Home Office.

The The Home Office has refused to comment on the lost dossier which is thought to have concealed the name of a second person.

The missing file was recorded as “not found” and “presumed transferred to MoJ (Ministry of Justice) but not located”.

Last March, three months after Janner’s home was searched by police, he signed the property over to his three children, keeping the £2million house out of reach of potential child abuse victims suing for compensation.

The Mirror reports:

Details of the 1986 Janner file are buried in the appendix to the Wanless report, which investigated the missing sex abuse dossiers.

The report, published in Nov­­ember, studied claims that the 114 files disappeared as part of an Establishment cover-up.

And today Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders – who ruled Janner will not face trial because he has Alzheimer’s – denied having any role in it and refused to quit.

Saying critics could challenge her decision in the courts, she revealed that four medical experts agreed Janner was not fit to stand trial.

“If somebody wants to challenge it, I’m not afraid… I am not part of the Establishment.

“I understand how frustrated the complainants must be about it. I share their frustration.”

She added that it was not the DPP’s role to “duck the difficult decisions”.

The title of the lost Janner file – “Greville Janner MP [redacted] re evidence in child abuse cases” – is thought to have concealed the name of a second person. It was recorded as “not found” and “presumed transferred to MoJ [Ministry of Justice] but not located”.

Ms Saunders has said that, had he been judged fit to stand trial, Janner, 86, would have been charged with 22 sex offences against nine children from 1969 to 1988.

  • Lloyd Kennedy

    22 sex offences against nine children from 1969 to 1988 doesn’t exactly sound arbitrary. If he’s so convinced he’s innocent why doesn’t he offer to go into court ? Because he’s guilty as fuck I suspect .