|
Sunday
Star Times
January 13, 2002,
Money for old sex abuse
by Frank Haden
I was horrified to
hear of a law firm’s plans to investigate and prosecute claims for
compensation for alleged sex abuse in return for a quarter of the proceeds
I immediately called Peter Ellis, convicted of sex abuse crimes that never
occurred, to find him disturbed but not surprised, "It is clear New
Zealand hasn't learned anything from the civic creche case," he told me.
By now, most people know the firm says in a mail-out offer: "You may be
entitled to a lump sum of up to $25,000 and ongoing payments valued in excess
of $175,000".
This reminds Ellis of the antics of ACC staffers who rushed up to
Christchurch Civic Creche parents waving claim forms long before charges were
laid against him. He sees the new scenario, with thousands already lining up
for handouts, as a repeat performance.
In the creche case
the ACC people told
parents they had better get with their claims before the lump sum payment
system was abolished. A number of parents accepted the invitation with
indecent haste, lodging $10,000 claims that were duly paid, in at least one
case several times over
It all became a bit much. When the nation-wide number of sex abuse claims
multiplied 5800% from 221 in 1988 to 13,000 five years later, the government
abolished lump sum payments, but these will be reintroduced from April 1.
Wakefield Associates’ offer must astound many law professionals. I am sorry
to say the firm is within it’s rights in making it, though why a respected
practice should choose this course is beyond me.
The law was regrettably changed some years ago to allow lawyers to encourage
litigation by informing people of the possibilities of successful legal
action. Until then such activity was condemned as barratry.
OK, times have changed, but I am alarmed by Wakefield Associates pointing out
to potential clients that under ACC rules a person making a claim is not
required to have reported the alleged abuse to the police. It is staggering
to find ACC admitting without shame it will take the word of victims, and pay
out when there has been no conviction or even a police inquiry. In other words, anyone at all can get into
the act. The caper is on for young and old. There’s nothing to stop anyone
who thinks they could do with $10,000 just for dredging a few tall tales out
of their memories.
Making things even worse this time is the ACC’s own mail-out of 200,000 cards
inviting people to stake claims. As Ellis said when I called him at his home,
where he was minding his nephew: “All you need is someone who says to
themselves, ‘Life’s a bit sad, so why don’t I go for it?’
“A psychologist involved in the civic crèche case still appears in court
saying the same things and my information is at least one of the women who
instigated the charges is still operating as a sex abuse counsellor.
”We still have a situation where if a child is frightened by a mouse, that’s
an indication of sexual abuse. Of course there are genuine instances of sex
abuse, but in all cases, genuine and non-genuine, the counsellor doesn’t need
evidence. She simply tells the child: ‘I believe you.’
”And what of the law professors up and down the country who have been saying
they are gravely concerned by the matters raised in Lynley Hood’s book? What
must they make of this mail-out offer?”
Ellis is right. The readiness with which people suddenly recover memories of
sexual abuse if there is money in it is well illustrated by the 2000 calls the
ACC received within hours of the mail-out.
The law firm’s introduction says symptoms of sex abuse can include loss of
self-esteem, depression, anxiety, irritability and concentration
difficulties. This list of “symptoms” is all too familiar in the litany of
the recovered memory industry in Christchurch.
As we all know, civic crèche children exhibiting the “symptoms” common among
toddlers dumped each day by working parents in the care of strangers were
closely interrogated to see if they were sex abuse victims and in no time at
all were claiming they had been defecated on, peed on, hung up in baskets,
had sticks shoved up their vaginas and anuses and made to stand inside a
circle of adults doing threatening things.
Wakefield Associates says it won’t charge unsuccessful claimants a thing if
they have kept their part of the bargain and carried their claims through. If
claimants change their minds and withdraw from the action they will have to
pay expenses and disbursements plus a fee for services rendered.
But why would they pull out? It’s money for old rope.
|
