Pages

Tuesday, 21 November 2017

From six 'victims' to none ! Poor Liz

Goodness Gracious, I'm indebted to 'Linda' for this tweet and it's link to a press story that nicely links up  with my current research ! 


The article, published on November 19th 2016, exposed the dubious practice employed by some lawyers, in prisons ! Nowhere else mind, just prisons ! 


Slater and Gordon actually admitted that it had submitted claims on behalf of people they hadn't even met.


These 'letters' of claim, civil claim that is, were submitted after June 2016. Bear in mind, that Henriques had himself suggested in January, that Janner should have been charged on three counts, in 2007. 



The firm wrote: 'We have not been able to meet personally with our client, who is an inmate.' It added: 'There is no police statement'.
In some other cases, the firm says it is basing the damages claims on police interviews and statements.


 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3951434/Lawyers-chase-cash-child-sex-abuse-victims-ve-never-met-never-police-statement.html

Grevile Janner died in December 2015. This was Liz Dux's reaction 

 Liz Dux, abuse lawyer at Slater and Gordon, who represents six of Lord Janner's alleged victims, said: "This is devastating news for my clients. They have waited so long to see this case come before the courts, to be denied justice at the final hurdle is deeply frustrating. 

Worth a read - provides an interesting timeline regarding the Janner history 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/12059939/Labour-peer-Greville-Janner-has-died-after-a-long-illness.html 

Dux was determined to get closure for her six claimants, the fight would go on 



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3367112/Lord-Janner-dies-aged-87.htmlhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3367112/Lord-Janner-dies-aged-87.html

Going back to the November 2016 article, S and G were keen to point out that they were NOT representing any Operation Midland claimants 



Funny ! I was under the impression that Janner fell within the scope of Operation Midland. But I'll come back to that later. You see, the late Lord's family fought back, many of the allegations were challenged, and - whoosh, just like that Liz's 6 'victims' became NONE ! 




 
They would subject all claimants to intense cross-examination !


Only proper scrutiny of this claim could have ferreted out that information. WHY hadn't this been done by the solicitors acting on his behalf ? Was this one of the 'one in eight or nine' claimants that pass muster with Richard Scorer's firm - Slater and Gordon ? Looks that way doesn't it folks ? 


 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/28/lord-janner-sex-abuse-case-collapses-six-claimants-abandon-legal/

Goodness Gracious indeed ! 

 https://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/slater-and-gordons-one-in-eight-or-nine.html

Getting back to Operation Midland - I'll leave Matthew Scott to explain what a disaster that turned out to be


 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/11/operation-midland-was-a-disaster-from-start-to-finish-the-public/

 

Friday, 17 November 2017

A letter to Alexis

Goodness Gracious, don't take your eye off the ball for five minutes, someone may make a mistake, and no one will bother to correct it ! Worse still, no one will actually notice. No one except awkward folk like me. I'm talking about money, the costs and funding of child sex abuse cases, those that involve a lot of risk to the company bringing the case that is ! Bear with me, I'm no expert, and neither do I want to be. My remit is purely, fact checking. You see, this inquiry has been going on for a few years now, it's costing a hell of a lot of money, so the very least it and it's core participants from the legal world, should be able to do is - 

Tell me, what is the income threshold for funding via legal aid ? Here's what Garsden and Scorer, think, it is 




He thinks the income threshold is £2,700 a year ? That figure is actually per year, not per month, as far as I can make out, and I have checked several sources. It is rather complicated, so - as usual happy to be corrected. Remember, we're dealing with legal aid for civil claims for sexual abuse, it's important to know, which bit of the law your case fits into. 

Here's what the government says 


By way of a slight apology, the IICSA twitter folks actually did link the transcript of the seminar, that very day ! See what I mean about missing something ?


The first few pages are all you need to read today folks

https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/919/view/iicsa291116_a.pdf 

How did the press react to that alleged ' sort of poverty gap'  ?








Is this what Scorer meant when he said his firm only actually proceeded with about one in eight or nine claims ? Who knows ? The Savile claims and their costs, were all met by the estate itself, no need for public funding (legal aid). But, that's another story ! The IICSA inquiry isn't about Savile type civil claims. It's about the bigger picture ... those poor souls allegedly abused in settings where some organisation allegedly failed in their duty of care. 

But, before I'd want to know about that, I want someone to tell me, if what Garsden and Scorer say is true. Are legal fees really a 'barrier to justice' for the poor ? Can one of those dozen or so lawyers in the room, please ask their admin staff to check the income threshold for legal aid please ? Thanks 


https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/29/legal-fees-are-a-barrier-to-justice-for-sex-abuse-victims-inquiry-hears






 

Thursday, 16 November 2017

The Civil Justice System Seminar Day One

Bloody hell, it was hard work tracking down the transcript of the video uploaded by the IICSA people, that I used in my last post ! This one 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PeR6XFx5ys&t=383s 


 I assume it is the official IICSA folk who are behind this youtube account. It's not very well laid out, I mean, look at the 'playlists' 


Try watching one of those THREE videos





OK, there's plenty of videos in the 'videos' section. But, let's just take the one I'm most interested in, to begin with. What is it ? When did this seminar take place ? Where's all the information folks ? Aren't you getting paid enough to do the most simplest of things ? 

Fortunately, there are obsessives like me who like facts and like to know exactly what's what. That's why, shortly after finishing my last effort, I decided to go looking for a transcript of my video. I mean, surely there had to be one ? It took some time, in fact, I've just found it. You see, without knowing exactly what it is you're looking for, it's darned hard to find.





https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/919/view/iicsa291116_a.pdf 

So, now you have it ! Now, you can hear what MR Scorer et al have to say about what sort of cases they take on and why. I'll be burrowing into this in the next few days ... or so. Don't hurry me folks, I'm taking it easy these days, but I'm still here. Ain't going nowhere, until I get some sort off Justie for Jimmy !

Apparently, they're having some problems getting people to engage with them. LOL, not many 'survivors, in that room full of lawyers. And, I'm not being nasty, you see, I'm learning a bit about stuff like limitation and public funding etc etc. But, I need a break right now. Plenty of time, we have a new seam of information now folks. A sort of lawyers version of the Pollard Report, just not as easy to access, or read ! Someone give them a bit more public money, that should help !


I count FIVE 'survivors' I lost count of the lawyers ! 




Thursday, 9 November 2017

Slater and Gordon's One in eight or nine !

From the horses mouth guys and gals ! Richard Scorer revealed just how many compensation claims his company will 'filter out'. Why ? Well, because in his words, there simply isn't a legal basis upon which to proceed, that's why ! What the hell does he mean ? I'll let him and his learned pals explain it to you. The IICSA has it's own you tube channel. Here's Day One of the Civil Justice System seminar from December last year ! Scroll along to 30.17 if you want to get down to the brass tacks

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PeR6XFx5ys

I don't know all their names, but the bloke in the glasses is from Irwin Mitchel solicitors, and between him and Richard Scorer (far left) is Peter Garsden. What joy it is to listen to these ***** talk about money. But, listen we must if we are to learn anything at all. 

At some point the chairman questions Scorer about the 'large proportion of claims' that his company turns down. What is the criteria for acceptance of that, one in eight or nine ? Scorer's answer - Is (the claim) likely to be true ? Is it provable. Is there a defendant that can be sued ? He/she doesn't have to be alive, but they do have to be 'solvent'

We still don't know how many of the Savile claims were paid out. We do know, roughly at least, how many were accepted. Not sure how Mr Scorer's one in eight/nine sits with the following figures.

HERE WE GO 

November 2014





Feb 2015 - from Joshua Rosenberg - Guardian relating to Oct 2014


So, that's 199

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/26/jimmy-savile-and-the-complex-question-of-victim-compensation

While, just a month later in November David Rose 


By July 2016, only 78 claims 'against the estate' had been 'agreed' by the High Court. Not sure how many of these were Liz Dux's 168 claimants 




Poor comfort for them that got nowt despite being accepted by Ms Dux and Co ! Laugh out loud as we often say ! Not sure how many survivors attended the first day of the compo solicitors gig. I think there may have been one or two more of them than solicitors. But I cannot be sure just looking at this clip. 


Mr Scorer notes his paydays usually total between £10,000 and £40,000. His - one-in-eight-or-nine, would get more, save the fact they couldn't prove loss of earnings ! Another participant quoted payments of just £3000 to £4000. Wow, what does Slater and Gordon have that he didn't ?

Someone, or rather, something very solvent, whose assets are generally not their own, no doubt. Such as : the Anglican Church, The Roman Catholic Church, Lambeth Council, Nottingham County Council etc etc etc





To be continued - Next time

 

Sunday, 29 October 2017

Get lost - it's just Jimmy messing around

It's 6 years to the day that Jimmy Savile died. Yes, I've been hacking away at this for nearly six years, and what's it got me ? Well, quite a lot as it happens. I've met, and made friends with some really nice folk and while there's been some shitty times, there's been some laughs. 

Today folks, let's laugh at how far the world of believe the victim has come. It's come to this 


Yes, that's form President of the - rather less United, than they used to be - States of America. And, six years after Savile, he's being accused of .... well, actually I'm not sure what he's being accused of. Grabbing some woman's bottom by the looks of it. No sooner had the story broke, George issued an apology. He may not even know what he's apologising for - he kept it vague


Here's what Ms Lund says happened




 Naturally, we all wanted to see the photo she's referring to. Not sure why she'd not want to confirm if it was this one







 Lord knows if CNN or anyone else has bothered to track down any of the folk she allegedly informed about the incident. 


It was only a few years ago, so I doubt Ms Lind got the response Sylvia Edwards allegedly received when she allegedly told the floor manager of Top of the Pops, that Jimmy Savile had allegedly, assaulted her ! LOL


You can read the full story here, I really cannot be bothered to go through all that again. You can even watch the video, if it's still there, on you tube !  Make your own mind up, was she assaulted ? was her life destroyed as a result ? 


The dame concluded that this was a 'serious assault' I kid you not !


 http://rabbitaway.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/he-had-his-hand-up-my-skirt.html

Well, it made me smile anyway !!