//See previous post. It seems the whole of the Janner thread on vipcsa.wikidot.com is diverted for some people. this is where things stand at present//
Dear Mr Lawson,
I write in relation to your correspondence dated 11th September 2014. In accordance with our guidance a complaint can only be made directly by the individual concerned or on their behalf by a nominated representative such as a family member, friend or support group. Your comments have therefore been noted and registered as a feedback.
I note you have expressed dissatisfaction about the lack of communication from CPS London, we have no record of previous communication from you in relation to this matter.
For your information I have attached the feedback and complaints.
Sayma Khatun| CPS London VRR & Complaints Co-ordinator
Crown Prosecution Service, London
5th Floor, Rose Court
2 Southwark Bridge Road
DX 15436 Southwark 12
Dear Sayma Khatuni
Thank you for your email.
You will recall that in my complaint I write that I "have been directly affected by the failure of the CPS in London to communicate with me in a reasonable way about this matter".
I have received 4 emails from your colleagues in Enquiries, 5 from Gavin Brown at the Press office, and one from Mr Malcolm McHaffie in Special Crime. They are attached.
You will see that each one of them is entirely void of engagement with the substance of my correspondence.
I also attach my original complaint.
In my complaint I wrote that "I am also affected directly as a citizen since the CPS is not acting in the public interest by accepting these two claims of dementia uncritically and without seeking to check them by requesting second psychiatric opinions backed by special investigations including MRI scans".
This is not mere feedback. I am making a serious complaint about a decision that someone in the CPS has made about two very important cases, in that they neglected to carry out due diligence by checking the validity of the claim of dementia made by two men accused of serious crimes.
There is a great deal of public concern about the issue of child sexual abuse at present, and your correspondence shows no indication that the CPS shares this concern.
The decision to accept the claim of dementia by Varley and Janner needs to be reviewed, and the review needs to be carried out quickly, since if there is indeed a dementia process in either one of these accused, the passage of time may mean that the dementia may become untreatable.
I would ask you therefore to reconsider your decision effectively to set aside my complaint, and instead to take it seriously.
If you are minded not to do so, I will ask formally that my complaint be referred to the Independent Assessor of Complaints.
If you are minded not to do this, since you classify this correspondence as feedback and not complaint, I will take it up with my MP, John Penrose, with a request for my complaint to be referred to the Minister of Justice, on the assumption that the CPS is ultimately responsible to the MoJ.
I am cc-ing this email to John Penrose to forewarn him of developments, but will hold back from taking things further until I have heard that the CPS does not intend to review your decision.
I look forward to your speedy response
With kind regards
Dr Richard Lawson