|
The Press
July 7, 1999
'Contaminating factors' stressed
NZPA
Wellington - If the jury that convicted Peter Ellis had been aware of the
extent of the investigating officer's stress and his relationships with
mothers he was investigating, "it would have made hay" with the
information, the Court of Appeal in Wellington was told.
In the second day of Ellis's second appeal against his 1993 convictions for
sexual abuse, his counsel, Judith Ablett-Kerr, QC, yesterday strongly opposed
opinion from the bench that the competence of former detective Colin Eade was
beyond the scope of the hearing.
Justice Gault said Governor-General Sir Michael Hardie Boys had declined to
review the competence of Mr Eade, adding, "in the light of that, I think
you're overdoing it".
Mrs Ablett-Kerr replied: "My purpose has been to demonstrate
contaminating factors ... if the jury had had (access to withheld documents)
they would have made hay with them.
"Detective Eade escaped relatively unscathed."
Mrs Ablett-Kerr referred to various documents that had not been disclosed by
the Crown to the defence. In relation to Mr Eade, these highlighted his, at
times, extreme stress, and his "inappropriate" telephone behaviour
with a mother of one of the children.
She also suggested he may have been unqualified for a mass-allegation case of
such scope as the Peter Ellis investigation.
"The job required someone who was cool and of a steady mind, someone who
perhaps was experienced in this type of arena."
Among other documents she said had not been disclosed, was a police report
that showed early police concern about parents reading literature on ritual
abuse.
"This is the heart of the case, that it is going on," Mrs
Ablett-Kerr said.
Similarly undisclosed had been a document showing police concern about
parents being in "a frenzy" at an early creche meeting, before
charges were made against Ellis.
Photographs had not been made available to the defence, including one from a
creche parent, seized by the police, that showed the unlikelihood that the
alleged abuse, which supposedly happened in the creche toilets, would not be
seen by other creche workers. Others showed children on innocent outings,
giving clues to details recalled by some of the children in other, abusive
situations.
Speaking of repeated parental interviewing of their children, Mrs Ablett-Kerr
said: "In my submission, the extent of interviewing by parents in this
case was highly unusual."
One parent had relayed her version of what another child's mother had said to
her daughter, saying: "This is what (the girl) has said. Did it happen
to you?".
"If a professional interviewer did that, I have no doubt that it would
have been thrown out," she said.
Just how vulnerable to suggestion children were, could be seen in one child
who, in a professional interview, used the words "clitoris" and
"vulva".
"These types of words, in my submission, are unusual for a child."
Appearing with Mrs Ablett-Kerr, Greg King argued that the evidence of the
eldest girl, presented at trial as the most uncontaminated, had been used as
a "yardstick" by the jury in accepting allegations of the others.
But the girl, at the time nine years old, had subsequently retracted her
allegations, and had not changed her stance over nine years.
"This court has recognised on numerous occasions that where there are
multiple complainants, there's inherently a prejudice to the accused
person," he said.
--------------------
Caption:
Photo: Dominion - Winston Wealleans, left, Barry Doyle, Roger
Keys, Nancy Gillespie, and Mike Hill support Peter Ellis's mother, Lesley,
front, at the Court of Appeal in Wellington.
|
