|
Otago Daily Times
March 15, 2001
Goff says expert's comments on Ellis investigation misconstrued
by Sally Rae
Justice Minister
Phil Goff says Dunedin
lawyer Judith Ablett-Kerr QC has misconstrued the comments of one of the
experts used in an investigation into the conviction of Peter Ellis on 13 sex
offences involving children.
In a statement yesterday, Mr Goff said Ellis's counsel, Mrs Ablett-Kerr, had
"got it wrong" claiming Prof Graham Davies, of Leicester University,
had advised a broader inquiry was needed.
On Tuesday, Mr Goff announced he had recommended the Governor-General decline
Ellis' application for a pardon. His decision followed a lengthy
investigation by the former Chief Justice, Sir Thomas Eichelbaum.
"Prof Davies said in the report there were issues beyond his remit
relating to details of evidence which the wider inquiry may wish to
consider," Mr Goff said.
The reference to the "wider inquiry" meant the inquiry by Sir
Thomas, he said.
Mr Goff reminded Mrs Ablett-Kerr of Sir Thomas's conclusion that the case
advanced by Ellis failed "by a distinct margin" and that his
findings were not "anything like a borderline judgement".
In response, Mrs Ablett-Kerr said Prof Davies made two references to the need
for wider investigation.
The first was when he referred to the careful scrutiny that would be needed
to establish the contact of parents as it related to information provided at
the recorded interviews.
The second was when he referred to the charges involving the creche itself,
which he said "deserve to be taken seriously" but "need to be
studied in the wider context of the investigation".
If Prof Davies, when talking of the "wider inquiry", meant Sir
Thomas's inquiry, then he clearly did not understand the very limited
material available to the inquiry, nor its narrow terms of reference, Mrs
Ablett-Kerr said.
"I fully accept that Sir Thomas will have spent over 400 hours studying
tapes, depositions and trial transcripts, just as I have spent in excess of
4000 hours studying the Ellis case as a whole.
"I have strived to make clear on behalf of Mr Ellis that it is matters
outside the depositions, tapes and trial transcripts that have to be examined
in order to satisfactorily review this case," she said.
Mrs Ablett-Kerr noted Sir Thomas's conclusion, but also noted it had been
arrived at "on the basis of a narrow referral and access to limited
material".
|
