|
|
The |
|
Calls for an inquiry and speculation about compensation were among
reactions yesterday to the discharge of three crèche workers. Ms Gaye Davidson, Ms Janice Buckingham, and Mrs
Marie Keys were discharged by the High Court on Tuesday of one charge each
that they indecently assaulted a child in their care. After their discharge they described the six months following the
laying of charges against them as a nightmare and said the allegations had
ruined their lives. Several parents yesterday called for an inquiry into the events
resulting in the closing of the Christchurch Civic Childcare Centre and the
charges against the women. Mrs
Patricia Dia who had two children at the crèche,
called for an inquiry into the training and expertise of Social Welfare
Department staff who interviewed children about abuse. The department's Children and Young Persons' Service programme manager,
Ms Anne Caton, said the three women's discharge
yesterday had "absolutely not" discredited the interviewing unit. The Mr Justice Williamson warned yesterday that he would not hesitate to recommend
prosecution for contempt if there was any comment "which reflects generally
upon the witnesses who are to give evidence or Peter Ellis or other aspects
of his trial." Peter Ellis is the only one of five crèche workers originally charged
with indecencies against children to face trial. Ms Deborah Gillespie was discharged
last month. In his ruling, His Honour said he would have preferred his judgment on
the three other women workers to have been given publicly because "It
would explain to the public why this court has acted in the way it has."
He was, however, conscious of the importance of a fair trial for Peter Ellis. The women and their lawyers will consider the issue of seeking compensation
during the next month. Ms Davidson said the priority was the question of reimbursement for cnsls incurred in defending the charges. The women would
then look nt bringing a damages claim against the
authorities, she said. The women had legal aid but were required to contribute $25,000 to the
costs. Their individual contributions were determined by their personal
circumstances. Defence costs incurred in the 11-week District Court depositions hearing
and two weeks of hearings into pre-trial applications in the High Court are expected
to exceed $120,000. A discharge does not automatically entitle the women to reimbursement
for costs incurred in their defence. Under the Costs and Criminal Cases Act 1967 the courts ask whether the
prosecution was reasonably and properly brought and pursued, and whether the
accused brought the charges on their own heads. Costs are awarded according to a scale unless the accused can show the
case had special difficulty, complexity, or importance. A Damages actions against the police in "Plaintiffs have to show the police did not have a case to start
with, and did not have a shred of evidence," he said. Mr Turkington said aggrieved clients often
preferred to let the matter drop because of the emotional and financial cost
of bringing an action and the additional material that might be raised in a
civil trial. Ms Davidson said the cause of the women's ordeal "was too big an
issue to walk away from". "No doubt it will be exhausting but we must see it through,"
she said. "I can't see what else could come out. We still have nothing
to hide." Persona] grievances taken by the four women originally charged, and nine
other former centre employees against their employer, the Christchurch City
Council, were proceeding, the secretary of the Southern Local Government Officers'
|
