Page 8

Like many others, I wonder whether Peter Ellis should have been convicted, for all the good reasons in all the objections subsequently raised (Editorial, December 8). And if he should not have been, then it is appalling that he should be so contemptibly branded.

However, the charge against Ellis had a beginning somewhere. Something happened to set off the chain reaction that led to his trial and conviction, which the dubious nature of the investigation and the likelihood that children were coerced into making baseless fabrications may only have served to camouflage.

I wonder whether Ellis may, in fact, be guilty, not on the grand scale found in court but perhaps of a single act of abuse (in which case, of course, he has been justly convicted).

And should such abuse have taken place, I wonder about the effect on the child concerned, not only of the act itself but of subsequent events, of so many people implying that he/she was lying – particularly should Ellis ever be found not guilty, for whatever reason.

Chris Wheatley

(Wellington)