wrinkly67 Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 well he didn't turn up to court 'cos his lawyer said attending court could cause him some harm. poor lamb http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33923041 as I've understood it the judge has ordered he does appear. has given an alternative court nearer his home. but has to be there by 2.00pm today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marx Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 I expect it is being stage managed like the Child Abuse Enquiry, now on its third Chair, giving people like Jenner enough time to die and not to be held to account for their horrible crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 The cost will be considerable - although I dont necessarily think that should be a significant factor when dealing with cases like this concerning a so -called prominent member of the establishment - quite why CPS sent a QC along when the hearing was always going to be over in seconds escapes me. if anyone thinks that he is going to be "held to account" please look up the sentences available for someone not fit to stand trial then tried on the actus reus - (the facts) It will involve a trial of some length, occupy a court and doubtless they will have it tried by a High Court Judge who can do not a great deal to an 87 year old suffering from and accepted to be so by the Prosecution dementia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 The cost will be considerable - although I dont necessarily think that should be a significant factor when dealing with cases like this concerning a so -called prominent member of the establishment - quite why CPS sent a QC along when the hearing was always going to be over in seconds escapes me. if anyone thinks that he is going to be "held to account" please look up the sentences available for someone not fit to stand trial then tried on the actus reus - (the facts) It will involve a trial of some length, occupy a court and doubtless they will have it tried by a High Court Judge who can do not a great deal to an 87 year old suffering from and accepted to be so by the Prosecution dementia. I think you're missing the point. Nobody expects him to be sentenced to jail. His reputation will be officially trashed, assuming he's found guilty, and it sends a very strong message to others in positions of power who might be tempted to do similar things that they won't be able to rely on the powers that be covering things up for them in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 not missing the point at all - I think others who may be expecting something to happen to him might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 I think you're missing the point. Nobody expects him to be sentenced to jail. His reputation will be officially trashed, assuming he's found guilty, and it sends a very strong message to others in positions of power who might be tempted to do similar things that they won't be able to rely on the powers that be covering things up for them in the future. A "Trial of Facts" can't return a guilty verdict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 What a waste of time and money. You're going to get more sense out of a trifle than you would out of a man who has been diagnosed with dementia since 2009 (a time when Jimmy savile was still getting buildings named after him). His reputation can still be rightly trashed and any pensions etc removed. We know he won't go to jail. But this is bordering on farcical. When are dragging the police through the courts who ignored/buried all this over the decades? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Joker Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 What a waste of time and money. You're going to get more sense out of a trifle than you would out of a man who has been diagnosed with dementia since 2009 (a time when Jimmy savile was still getting buildings named after him). His reputation can still be rightly trashed and any pensions etc removed. We know he won't go to jail. But this is bordering on farcical. did being diagnosed with dementia stop him tuning up to collect his daily allowance and voting? did it stop him transferring his assets from his name to his family? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 (edited) did being diagnosed with dementia stop him tuning up to collect his daily allowance and voting? did it stop him transferring his assets from his name to his family? Alzheimers is a horrible condition. At the start decline is gradual - my father was capable of driving, making rational decisions around money etc up until two years before his death - the decline in the final two years was rapid - the last 6 months even more so. Edited August 14, 2015 by Longcol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francypants Posted August 14, 2015 Share Posted August 14, 2015 did being diagnosed with dementia stop him tuning up to collect his daily allowance and voting? did it stop him transferring his assets from his name to his family? In June 2014whilst supposedly suffering with dementia he attended the House of Lords, claiming expenses as it was official business. He also drove himself there in his own car !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now