|
NZ Herald
February 18, 2002
Law journal attacks Ellis process
The legal system's
handling of the Peter Ellis case was flawed, says the New Zealand Law
Journal.
In an editorial to be published today , the independent publication says
former Chief Justice Sir Thomas Eichelbaum's judgment, when leading a
ministerial inquiry into the Christchurch Civic Creche child-abuse case, was
either wrongly directed or at fault.
The article's author, journal editor Bernard Robertson, calls for the repeal
of part of the Evidence Act and questions whether the appeals process can
deliver justice. He alleges courts have been "conned" by
psychologists.
The opinion piece also criticises the police investigation of the case,
saying "it suffered from a clear fault which was that it was driven by a
junior officer with a bee in his bonnet".
Mr Ellis, who maintained he was innocent, was released from prison in 2000
after serving seven years of a 10-year sentence. His conviction was twice
referred to the Court of Appeal and was the subject of a ministerial inquiry.
Mr Robertson cites author Lynley Hood's book A City Possessed at the start of the article, calling it
"the first attempt at a review of the whole case from the investigation
onwards".
He applauds her "astute criticism of the shortcomings of the various
methods available to review criminal convictions".
The strength of the 600-page book is the full reproduction of witness
statements, in contrast to the Court of Appeal's admission that it examined
extracts of the statements, he says.
The ministerial inquiry had similar limitations.
"Either Sir Thomas did not read those statements because, like everyone
else, he restricted himself to the filleted evidence that the judge allowed
in, or, with respect, his judgment is at fault."
Adrian More, Otago District Law Society president, said the journal was
"read by many lawyers and has many helpful articles but its editorial
comment is not intended to represent the views of lawyers generally".
|
