Keith Vaz Called For New Law To Protect His Friend Greville Janner

In 1991 Keith Vaz proposed a new law to protect the ‘innocence’ of his ‘friend’ and ‘neighbour’ Greville Janner because  of the ‘lies’ that had been told about the now Lord Janner.

I particularly like this part given as a reason for such a law  to protect the ‘innocent’:

“My hon. and learned Friend [Greville Janner], too, is a brave man in what he has done, said and endured over the past weeks and months. Every one of us should be grateful to him, because…what has happened to my hon. and learned Friend could happen to any one of us, so we should all be aware of it.”

Says it all really…

vaz

Mr. Keith Vaz (Leicester, East)

I first met my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner) when, at his invitation, I came to the House with his son to see how Parliament operated. I would not have believed that a few years later I would have been selected as the prospective parliamentary candidate for Leicester, East, and would be his neighbour.

I am delighted to be here today to give my hon. and learned Friend my full support. My hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, South (Mr. Marshall) cannot be here today because of his parliamentary duties in Northern Ireland, but he joins me in believing my hon. and learned Friend to be the victim of a cowardly and wicked attack by people who simply did not care what damage they did to him or to anyone else. I too wish to extend my good wishes to my hon. and learned Friend’s wife and family, and to all his friends, who I know have stood by him during these terrible months. They have shared that terrible burden.

My hon. and learned Friend is a distinguished Member for Leicester, West. His family in intertwined with the history of the city of Leicester. Before he was elected in 1970, his father was the Member for Leicester, West. The people of his constituency do not believe the lies. They are with him now, and they will be with him in the future, because they know of his unstinting service to anyone who approaches him, for whatever cause. He has vindicated himself, and all of us, in what he has said tonight.

I remember a speech made by my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Ms. Short), who is another brave Member of the House who has suffered at the hands of a certain newspaper. I worked in the corridor where she had her office, and we Miss her in the west cloisters—especially her use of our fax machine. I recall that, just before her speech, my hon. Friend went through an agonising time wondering whether she should come before the House to tell it what she felt. Courageously, she did so—and struck a blow for every one of us in the House.

My hon. and learned Friend, too, is a brave man in what he has done, said and endured over the past weeks and months. Every one of us should be grateful to him, because, as the hon. Members for Rutland and Melton (Mr. Latham) and for Leicestershire, North-West (Mr. Ashby) said, what has happened to my hon. and learned Friend could happen to any one of us, so we should all be aware of it.

During the course of that terrible ordeal, I suggested to the Lord Chancellor that there should be a change in the law to provide for the protection of the innocent. The Lord Chancellor said that he would consider the idea. The Solicitor-General is here today, and I make him an offer. I came 18th in the ballot for private Members’ Bills. I know that that is not very high —and there are other subjects that I wish to raise. Nevertheless, I would happily introduce a Bill to cover the point if the right hon. and learned Gentleman would promise it a safe passage through the House.

We should not wait for another Criminal Justice Bill. There is parliamentary time, and we should get on with the job. I foresee that many unscrupulous people in this country would be prepared to do exactly the same thing again. If it is possible to do so, I will happily give the Solicitor-General my place.

Hansard

Advertisements

16 Comments

Filed under Abuse, News, Politics

16 responses to “Keith Vaz Called For New Law To Protect His Friend Greville Janner

  1. Keith Vaz eh? Mr Butter wouldn’t melt in my mouth, he of absolute honesty and integrity…..

  2. steve

    NOW HERE IS ON CROOK,suppose his right horrible bought VAZ some more cushions or something,oh no im wrong we buy all vazs stuff don’t we wasn’t so long ago he was caught in wrong doing,so its now time to pay his masters and cover up for there lawbreaking and misgivings,there a bunch of low lifes who are only out for themselves,TELL ME CREEPY VAZ AND HIS OPPOS HAVE DONE FOR LEICESTER EXCEPT TO RUN INTO THE GROUND,how do I no because I have to live in the city they ruined

  3. Rich

    Well I guess Vaz just had his eyes opened. He’d certainly be on my persons of interest list given his legal role at LB of Richmond. Thought his questioning of Danzcuk was borderline hostile.

  4. I was one of several doing door security at a conference held at Thame football club, when the cops showed up demanding a copy of every leaflet and pamphlet we had.

    They were most interested in material featuring the honourable and learned member for Leicester West, the conference wasn’t widely publicised, the venue was booked by the underwater unicycle club and yet the local constabulary got wind of it.

    I’m certain that it is but a coincidence that Janner had been named, by a witness on oath in the trial of R v Beck, as a child molester.

  5. It has been reported as I’m sure all are aware that a Labour Lord is being investigated for horrific sexual assaults on children.

    It should be remembered of course that it is possible to throw the editors and proprietors of the MSM further than you can trust them.

    Labour has more than one Lord of course, wouldn’t want to be unfair.

    • I’ve named Greville Janner as the Lord who will not be questioned or arrested. His guilt or innocence for the crimes that he is alleged to have committed is not established.

      The Labour member of House of Lords connected to Angell Road is a different person.

      So, you’re correct Labour has more than one Lord.

  6. Eamonn

    There is a concrete conflict of interests with Vaz having any role in the #CSAinquiry given his background and ‘friendships’.

  7. Reblogged this on DR Laverty and commented:
    Deeper and deeper

  8. JS2

    Reblogged this on TIME TO START CARING and commented:
    Makes me sick to the stomach, havent these bastards done enough damage to all these vulnerable people? oh I forgot, that was the plan all along!! banging my head against a brick wall …….

  9. R Morris

    So why do we have to pass a law protected the innocent when everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Sounds like some sort of double jeopardy in reverse or a typical :- Vaz- Fuzzy move ?

  10. Vaz =Hinduja scandal hence not fit to serve as a politician,he spends more time at my kids school handing out awards,I spent 6 months trying to get a response from his office-I am a constituent- I fully intend to confront him at his next appearance.