|
|
The
Christchurch Civic Creche Case |
|
The doors to Paparua
Prison opened briefly yesterday and Peter Ellis walked out. For most
prisoners, this moment of release is exquisite. After years counting down the
days and killing time, they are again free to suck in fresh air and move on. Peter Ellis says it is
different for him. He demands more than the opportunity to leave jail and
resume his life. Ellis, a convicted child molester, also wants to shed the
coils of guilt and opprobrium that have enclosed him for nearly eight years.
Like many people convicted of serious crimes, he says he is innocent. What
marks him out is his steadfastness -- and a series of disturbing, unanswered
questions about his conviction. Ellis was found guilty
on the evidence of pre-school children he cared for at Christchurch Civic
Creche. A single comment by one child grew into a wave of hysteria and
allegation. Parents and police panicked and children made outlandish claims
in video taped interviews. The testimony was censored at trial in a
successful attempt to make their claims more believable. Four of Ellis' female
colleagues were also charged with sex abuse. It was as if the creche workers
had run the centre as their own private harem, forcing children into committing
horrific sex acts and indulging in satanic rites. It eventually became clear
that the creche was not a den of perversion. But the police still charged
Ellis with 28 counts of indecency. He was convicted on 16 of them and in 1993
was jailed for 10 years. There it should have
ended: with Ellis, like so many other abusers, protesting innocence as he
faded from the headlines. But the controversy surrounding the case refused to
die. A campaign was mounted to free him as concern deepened about the
interviewing techniques used to extract evidence from the pre-school victims.
While there is no doubt young children can give reliable evidence that stands
up in court, there was suggestion the testimony in this case was unreliable. The filtering of that
testimony for the jury was also criticised. Surely jury members would have
been more questioning of the allegations if they knew of the fantastical
claims made by some victims. No one explained how Ellis could have inflicted
abuse at the creche without anyone noticing. Taken together, these
grey zones of doubt suggest justice may not have been done. But the Court of
Appeal has twice rejected an appeal against his conviction. Both times it
only had power to consider evidence presented at his original trial. At the second
appeal, however, the court did say there were grounds for an inquiry. Justice Minister Phil
Goff yesterday indicated a review of some sort will be held into the way
evidence against Ellis was collected. The inquiry is warranted and hopefully
will determine whether or not Ellis received a fair trial. But it is unlikely
by itself to resolve underlying questions of guilt and innocence. The truth has been
muddied both by the passage of time and the controversy and bitterness
surrounding the case. That is a burden both for Ellis and for the children
who said he preyed upon them.
|
