Janner ordered to attend court af ter he fails to turn up
LORD Janner has been ordered to appear in court over child sex charges despite suffering from ‘severe dementia’ and being unable to understand the proceedings.
The ruling came after the former Labour peer and MP failed to attend a preliminary hearing over the case yesterday.
His lawyers argued that the 87-year-old – who has been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s – could suffer ‘catastrophic’ distress if compelled to appear in person.
Chief magistrate Howard Riddle ruled that the suspected paedophile, who is accused of molesting nine boys between 1963 and 1988 and faces 22 charges, did not have to play a part in the hearing but was required by law to attend.
He ordered Janner to appear before him next Friday for a hearing to transfer the case to Crown Court. But he asked the prosecution and defence to look at the possibility of holding the hearing elsewhere, including the peer’s home.
Yesterday’s hearing at Westminster magistrates’ court was the first in the case since Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders, who initially said a prosecution would not be i n the public i nterest because of Janner’s ailing health, performed a U-turn and ruled he should face court.
Janner’s family say he ‘is entirely innocent’. Intimate details of his deteriorating health were revealed to the court as his barrister, Andrew Smith QC, explained why his client was ‘unfit’ to attend.
Psychiatrist Dr James Warner, who examined Janner on behalf of the defence, said: ‘There is no doubt in my mind that Lord Janner has dementia and it is severe.’ The consultant told the court Janner could suffer a ‘catastrophic reaction’ if he were brought to court.
‘Lord Janner would, in my opinion, not be able to comprehend virtually anything said to him or said in the court about him,’ he said. ‘He would not be able to understand he was here or the purpose of being here and as a consequence is highly likely to become distressed.’
He added that the peer’s condition was ‘beginning to really impact on his day-to-day life’. Dr Warner added that Janner was also showing the early signs of Parkinson’s and would find the court environment ‘perplexing and bewildering’.
A second psychiatrist called by the defence, Dr Norman Poole, agreed Janner was not fit to attend court and said he had witnessed him having a ‘catastrophic reaction’ after asking him a series of simple questions recently.
‘I didn’t feel physically threatened but clearly he was very angry,’ he added. But prosecutor Clare Montgomery QC successfully argued that arrangements could be put in place to minimise the potential distress to Janner.
Judge Riddle said Friday’s hearing could take as little as 30 seconds and the defendant could be removed if he became distressed.
He said that as he understands it, t he possible distress means ‘the defendant may well become intolerant of the process, irritable and may indeed leave. I further understand, and this is very significant, it is likely to have no longterm effect on him’.