http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1008,955044a1936,FF.html

 

"THE PRESS"

Christchurch, New Zealand.

Saturday, 29 September 2001

Pages 1-2, Weekend Section

 

FEATURES

 

LAST WORD

 

A new book on the Christchurch Civic Creche case has taken seven years of research by an award-winning author. Will it do anything to dispel the murky shadow of doubt that still lingers over events at the childcare centre? Martin Van Beynen reports.

 

Nearly 10 years after the allegation that set in train the Christchurch Civic Creche case, Peter Ellis will be queuing up with everybody else to buy A City Possessed.

 

The book, released for sale next week, will cover the case's tortured and tortuous developments over a decade in author Lynley Hood's trademark meticulously detailed and analytical style.

 

Seven years in the research and writing, the book has come too late to influence the main official decisions about the case but, depending on its contents, there are hopes in some quarters that it might still clear Ellis's name.

 

When he goes into the bookshop to get his copy, Ellis will have no clear idea what it will contain. Lynley Hood has promised a work which will show neither fear nor favour, and not even Ellis has been favoured with a pre-release copy.

 

Although the launch of the book is caught in the inevitable tangle of media deals and cloak-and-dagger secrecy, Hood has surprisingly, given the seven years we have been kept in suspense, shown her hand.

 

Writing in Touchy Subject – Teachers Touching Children, a collection of articles on the shift in the relationship between teachers and young children which was published in March, she said she had found no evidence of illegality by anyone accused in the case.

 

After years of "dredging through the mire" she had, she said, instead found convincing evidence that "more than 100 children had been subject to unpleasant and psychologically hazardous procedures for no good reason, and that a group of capable and caring adults with no inclinations towards sexual conduct with children had had their lives ruined as a result".

 

Ultimately, the question of how the police, the child-protection services, and the justice system had got it wrong, escalated her investigation into an intensive study of the past 30 years of New Zealand's social history, she says.

 

The study had revealed a convergence of feminism, religious conservatism, and the child-protection movement under the banner of combating child abuse.

 

With New Zealand initiatives in the field of child sexual abuse driven by this loose coalition, child sexual abuse became, like witchcraft in the 16th and 17th centuries, "a crime distinct from all others", Hood says.

 

New investigative techniques and special investigators had to be devised and laws passed to suit the cause.

 

Law changes that "swept away the rights of suspects to a fair trial", and the near-universal acceptance that the coerced evidence of child sexual abuse was reliable, made the "late 20th-century sexual abuse panic" possible.

 

"In New Zealand in 1993, these factors also made the conviction of Peter Ellis possible," she says.

 

These days, Ellis lives with his mother Lesley at Leithfield Beach and describes himself jokingly as a fully employed housekeeper.

 

"I go to Rangiora or Christchurch to shop, but while things are happening with things like books it's not easy to say to a prospective boss, `I'll be there 40 hours a week'," he says.

 

"In general, I still haven't had any nastiness anywhere. As far as saying it's behind me ... any sort of anonymity I might have been slightly acquiring is going to disappear again with this book. I've got to go through another six months of either letting the thing fade away or dealing with things if it doesn't disappear," he says.

 

He notes a comment by Lynley Hood that she has written the book without fear or favour, and says he has nothing to fear because nothing happened at the creche.

 

"If she has done the research, as she is saying, then either she has turned up something that says I was lying, or conversely she will have turned up nothing about me.

 

"At the end of the day it was a worldwide phenomenon that New Zealand is burying its head in the sand about and not dealing with ... It comes down to having a close look at our judiciary."

 

While not expecting the book will make a huge difference, he hopes it will get people thinking about the judicial system.

 

"It should make the public of New Zealand stop and think my daughter, my son, my husband, my wife may end up in a courtroom and this could happen to them," he says.

 

"If our judicial system is not working correctly, they ought to be jolly well concerned and they ought to be writing to their politicians.

 

"They ought to be saying to Helen Clark that the Civic Creche case has been limping along for 10 years on evidence that never ever supported that there was any child abuse there," he says.

 

The evidence, he says, was that children were questioned by their parents, by the police, by the therapists and counsellors far too much.

 

"The new research coming out of America is that children are no more reliable in a court of law than adults, and the bias against an accused in a child-abuse case means the accused is already in a strait jacket."

 

Despite not having the finances to take the case any further, such as to the Privy Council, he does not want to let the past 10 years go, he says.

 

"I made a big discovery in the last 10 years. Ten years ago, if there had been a fire or an earthquake at the Civic, I wouldn't have known if I would have been brave enough to go in and look for a missing child. Ten years down the track I know I am. I would have gone back in and looked.

 

"I have stuck my neck out for the rights of the children at the civic. I've said it didn't happen. The system got hold of it and I'm still a creche worker because I'm saying, `Kids, it didn't happen'.

 

"To turn around now and say you weren't worth fighting for anymore is a slap in the face to everyone, including all the people who have supported me and to the children.

 

"They had a good creche and they actually had some very, very good times, and there weren't bad times."

 

It would be nice to think A City Possessed will be the last word on the Christchurch Civic Childcare Centre Case, but it seems unlikely.

 

Ten years of challenges have failed to overturn the jury verdict finding Peter Ellis guilty of abusing seven children by urinating on them, putting his penis in their mouths and against their private parts, and by touching them indecently.

 

The complainant children are now teenagers, Ellis has served his 6 1/2 years in jail, police officers in charge of the case have moved on to other careers, but still the controversy goes on.

 

The case might continue to evoke a sense of unease, but after several Court of Appeal decisions and a ministerial inquiry, which pronounced the guilty verdicts against Ellis safe in March this year, it's hard to argue Ellis' plea of innocence has not been fully canvassed.

 

With the prominence given to the debate about whether Peter Ellis is guilty or not, it is easy to forget that four women creche workers – supervisor Gaye Davidson, and support workers Marie Keys, Janice Buckingham (now deceased), and Deborah Gillespie – were also charged with abuse of children at the creche.

 

One of my enduring memories of the case is the daughter of Marie Keys, still in her school uniform, convulsed in sobs as she heard Christchurch District Court Judge Eric Anderson refuse to drop the charge against her mother after a preliminary hearing in 1992.

 

Although all charges against the women were dropped before trial, they will also be hoping the book will turn a final page on the creche to show they were clearly wrongly accused.

 

It gives me no great pleasure to say that Lynley Hood will probably agree with me.

 

Reporting for The Press, I sat through many of the preliminary hearings on the case and was the only journalist to cover the whole six-week trial of Peter Ellis.

 

I was convinced at the time (and still am) that the women had been done a great wrong.

 

So when Ellis went on trial in May 1993, I went in with a feeling the trial would, by the sheer strength of the police case and the horror of the crimes, show why innocents had been dragged in.

 

But I saw or heard nothing over the next six weeks which convinced me that anything more than a bit of sloppy bookkeeping had occurred at the creche.

 

Lynley Hood, I suspect, has made much the same conclusion, but unless she has built up an overwhelming case showing where everyone went wrong, her book will most likely be regarded as yet another view, albeit a well-researched one.

 

It might take the debate a bit further along the road but the destination of a final, clear answer to the question of whether sexual and physical child abuse occurred at the Civic Creche will probably always remain elusive.

 

Ms Hood has researched the case exhaustively to reach her conclusion.

 

Mine involved no great deduction. After watching the numerous videotapes of interviews conducted by Social Welfare interviewers with the complainant children, it simply struck me that the inconsistencies, contradictions, and fantasies elicited from them made their testimony very questionable.

 

Did they tell lies? Maybe. It seemed to me that they were not so much lying, as telling stories as they went from interview to interview with narratives clearly influenced by questioning from their families, their interviewers, and interaction with other creche children.

 

Given the climate of the time, in which talk of organised child-abuse rings operating with the co-operation of people at all levels of society was given serious attention, it was not surprising the children should give the accounts they did.

 

In my view there is no escaping from the conclusion the kids made it up.

 

That is not to say children cannot give extremely accurate accounts of events or that they should automatically be regarded with grave scepticism when complaining of sexual abuse.

 

After hearing the evidence, I just thought it was pretty clear they were making it up. The jury disagreed and some very fine legal minds have sided with them. I have to accept my conclusion might be wrong.

 

Like Ellis's release from Paparua Prison nearly two years ago, the release of A City Possessed will no doubt rekindle the passionate and often rancorous debate about the case.

 

The arguments, tired though they might be, will probably emerge again just as fiercely as in the early days of the case.

 

Although both camps will be hoping the book will settle past scores, that might, at this late stage, be expecting too much.

 

Graphics: One of Lynley Hood, two of Peter Ellis.