Otago Daily Times
Friday, 15-October 1999

Ellis appeal turned down

Wellington: A renewed call for convicted child abuser Peter Ellis to be pardoned will be put to Governor-General Sir Michael Hardie Boys on Monday after the Court of Appeal yesterday dismissed Ellis' second appeal.

Ellis, now 41, spoken to by his counsel, Judith Ablett-Kerr, after the decision was given in Wellington, was reportedly "furious".

After the decision, Mrs Ablett-Kerr said that she would renew her appeal to Sir Michael, as well as continuing to battle for a royal commission of inquiry into the case.

Even though Ellis has consistently refused parole, he will be released automatically when two-thirds of his sentence has been served - in February.

Ellis was convicted in 1993 and jailed for 10 years on 16 counts of sexual offences against young children at the Christchurch Civic Childcare Centre.

Three convictions were quashed a year later at appeal after one complainant's retraction.

Yesterday's judgement was on a rare second appeal, after Sir Michael referred the case back to the court.

The appeal decision of court president Sir Ivor Richardson and Justices Gault, Thomas, Henry and Tipping found. -

· That all factors of interviewing technique contamination raised had been addressed in the lower court's proceeding and that new evidence raised at this appeal was insufficient to warrant overturning its decision.

Multiple allegation situations did not of themselves mean that the allegations were unreliable.

· A retraction by a complainant during the course of the 1994 appeal did not mean a miscarriage of justice because it had no material effect on the other verdicts.

· On the question whether the jury had been deprived of evidence allowing it to properly assess the reliability and credibility of the complainants, the court said the defence counsel had been alert to the relevance of bizarre allegations and it had been open to the defence to cross-examine all complainants on all disclosed allegations.

· In the matter of a juror who allegedly had a personal relationship with a person who worked alongside the mother of a complainant, the court ruled there was nothing to indicate that trial issues had been discussed. Claims that another juror was overheard saying Ellis was guilty had been denied, and did not raise concern.

· Bad faith on the part of the prosecution in withholding material was "largely academic". Withheld photographs of the creche showing a happy environment, and that the door to the toilets where many of the offences were alleged to have been committed was commonly open, added nothing to what was made clear at trial. - NZPA