|
NZ Herald
March 11 2000
Ellis team lukewarm to possibility of pardon
by Audrey Young
Convicted child-abuser Peter Ellis could be pardoned
if former Chief Justice Sir Thomas Eichelbaum decides the evidence children
gave was suspect.
Sir Thomas will head a one-man inquiry into the case for Justice Minister
Phil Goff and report by the end of August.
But there was muffled happiness in the Ellis camp yesterday and
disappointment that the Government's inquiry was not bigger.
Mr Ellis' mother, Lesley Ellis, did not put much store in the development.
"I don't have any confidence. After you've been through depositions, a
trial, two appeal hearings, why's this one going to be any different?
"A pardon isn't what we want," she said.
"We want to hear somebody finally say, 'This didn't happen'.
"I can't believe it is such a horrible mess and it has dragged on and on
and on and on. It's not good for anybody that has been involved."
Sir Thomas will have to decide whether any matters "give rise to doubts
about the assessment of the children's evidence to an extent which would
render the convictions of Peter Hugh McGregor Ellis unsafe and warrant the
granting of a pardon."
Colloquially, a pardon may be seen as forgiveness for having done something.
But that is not its meaning in the Crimes Act.
Legally, if Mr Ellis is granted a pardon, he will be deemed "never to
have committed that offence."
The inquiry was recommended by the Bench on the second Court of Appeal case.
The judges did not find enough new evidence on the so-called
"contamination" of children's testimony to set aside the guilty
verdict.
But they said a Commission of Inquiry could more appropriately handle issues
of evidence.
The ministerial inquiry was announced yesterday.
Ellis was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment in 1993 after being convicted
on 16 charges of sexually abusing seven children at the Christchurch Civic
Creche.
He was released from Paparua Prison last month and was not commenting
yesterday.
His mother and his lawyer, Judith Ablett-Kerr, QC, were both disappointed
that the Government had not ordered a wider, public Commission of Inquiry.
Mrs Ablett-Kerr said she had "the greatest of confidence" in Sir
Thomas.
But a Commission of Inquiry would have had the power to summons evidence.
Mr Goff suggested a Commission of Inquiry was not favoured because it could
have led to the questioning of the children and a relitigation of the case,
rather than looking at more focused legal points.
He doubted if there would ever be "a consensus of public opinion on the
innocence or guilt of Mr Ellis."
Sir Thomas will be required to evaluate opinions from at least two
internationally recognised experts on sexual abuse, and other relevant
parties.
|
