“THE DOMINION"
Wellington, New Zealand.
Saturday, October 27, 2001.
Weekend Magazine section
Page 12.
Lynley Hood's new book on the
Christchurch Civic Creche case knits together the elements surrounding Peter Ellis's
child abuse convictions into a valuable resource
A MAN WRONGED?
A CITY POSSESSED: The Christchurch
Civic Creche Case
By Lynley Hood
Longacre, $59.95
Reviewed by Dave Smith
Hood presents a passionate overview
of what some see as a witch trial
I HAVE NEVER read a 600-page book
right through before. Lynley Hood may not have got everything right about what
happened at the infamous creche, but with searing passion she has authored a
cogent overview of what posterity might view as New Zealand's equivalent of the
Salem witch trials. We all know fragments of the tale. To have reasoned dossier
on hand, no matter its "political" slant, is valuable and to
encounter a writer with such a sound grasp of legal nuance is a bonus.
Hood has knitted together all the
scores of divergent elements that surround the conviction of Peter Ellis on 16
charges of sexual indecencies with children. They comprise sudden upsurges in
sexual abuse consciousness, judicial deference to "experts" in child
abuse, the ACC rules allowing recovered-memory payments of up to $10,000 on
"proof" of molestation, the radical but inadequately debated charges
in the law whereby parent/child-generated complaints no longer needed
corroboration, the creche's political incorrectness, the driven detective Eade
and the social bravado of Peter Ellis.
The legal outcome we know. But have
there ever been such unusual legal processes and histrionics where the drama
has such Greek inevitability? The reader an be left anguished and torn. How can
the "first team" bench of the Court of Appeal be so admiring of a
trial in which the jury was allowed to see only fully scrubbed, cosily-edited
versions of interview videos? Why is there so little outrage when, during the
appeal phase, the first star witness fundamentally changes her tune and the
experts opine that this is but reinforcement of the central truth? Are some
recovered memories more valuable than others?
The appeal was argued on the daring
all-or-nothing ground that dubious and partial evidence was admitted and
"chaperoned" through by a judge benignly concerned to see Ellis
convicted. Ellis's defence lawyer (himself now a High Court judge) was a
reluctant but dutiful advocate. He stuck strongly to the unpopular view that,
even allowing for new evidential rules, the trial was skewed at the expense of
evidential principles that once were beacons of British law.
But it's not just about law. Hood
noses out both the flaws and the virtues of those involved. The hard-drinking,
ultimately self-destructive Ellis, the streetwise tradesman barrister Rob
Harrison, who would dutifully defend the seemingly indefensible, the scared
women staff of the creche who knew that their best line in court was to
distance themselves from Ellis while in their hearts they were with him.
Oddly, everyone is seen as basically
striving to be "good" and "watching out for the kids". But
when fear takes hold, who are the guardians? For me, the most chilling moment
is when the author, out of left field, justifies her gruelling first 250 pages
addressing the growing abuse industry and the "get the paedophile"
crusades.
Because Ellis was always typecast as
the man at the centre of a satanic "ring" of offenders, it had been
necessary to finger "supporting" creche staff. Yet when the women
defendants were discharged, the prosecution amended the charges so that
"persons unknown" were suddenly assisting Ellis in
"unknown", locations. Hood then lets rip that these gaps were filled
in by the fertile imaginations of a community now conditioned to assume that
there would be "others" lurking in the shadows.
Maybe the children did speak the
truth. The appeal judges were very firm that they did. They laid a hard (if
quaint) question on Ellis's courageous counsel: how could children speak of these
perversions unless they experienced them in some way? The picture of Ellis that
emerges is of one who supplied the answer every day of his life. His
semi-reckless flamboyance, love of daring wordplays and fabrication of bizarre
sexual stories about himself rubbed off on staff, parents and . . . perhaps
children. If ever a man talked himself into 10 years' jail, it could well have
been Peter Ellis.
* Dave Smith is a lawyer and
freelance writer
Graphic: Lynley Hood - Hood presents
a passionate overview of what some see as a witch trial
Graphic: Peter Ellis . . .
flamboyant an loved daring wordplays and fabrication of bizarre sexual stories
about himself