Nelson Mail
June 26 2003
Ellis case needs final resolution
Editorial
Two years ago an
editorial in The Nelson Mail noted that the case against convicted child
molester Peter Ellis had held together for years under intense scrutiny. It said
that it was time for the country to move on and for Ellis's victims to put
their ordeal behind them. Unfortunately, the country has shown itself unable to
move on, says the Nelson Mail in an editorial.
With the ever-mounting calls for a royal commission of inquiry into the affair,
Justice Minister Phil Goff needs to find a way to end debate once and for all.
If a royal commission is what's needed, so be it.
In 1993, Ellis was found guilty on 16 charges of child molestation at the
Christchurch Civic Creche, where he worked. Four of
his female co-workers were cleared.
Since then many people have been convinced by Ellis's protestations of
innocence, and doubts about his conviction have been bolstered by the
publication of Lynley Hood's book A City Possessed.
This week, Hood presented to Parliament a petition signed by 140 prominent New
Zealanders asking for a royal commission to inquire into the case.
Signatories included 26 MPs, two former prime ministers, nine queen's counsels,
three law professors and even a retired High Court judge.
So far, Mr Goff has resisted all calls to reopen the
case. He points out that there has been a trial, two appeal court hearings and
a ministerial inquiry, headed by former chief justice Sir Thomas Eichelbaum. Mr Goff maintains
there needs to be new evidence for the courts to look into the matter again.
In an unusual twist, millionaire publisher Barry Colman has offered a $100,000
reward to try to bring such new evidence to light.
Ellis, now freed after serving a full sentence, has had far more opportunity
than most to establish his innocence, and has failed to do so.
In the words of Sir Thomas Eichelbaum, he has failed
"by a distinct margin". The difficulty is that our system of justice
seeks to find accused people guilty or not guilty, which is not necessarily the
same thing as the truth.
The jury system, even when subject to review by courts of appeal, is imperfect
and can be flawed. A relevant example, with parallels to the Ellis case in the
way that it divided the community, was that of Arthur Allan Thomas, who was
eventually pardoned and compensated $1 million after being twice convicted of
murder.
The Thomas case also needed a book - David Yallop's
Beyond Reasonable Doubt - and a royal commission of inquiry to eventually
establish the truth.
It was an expensive process that dragged on for year after year, but in the end
justice was seen to have been done. That is the problem with the Ellis affair -
whether Ellis is innocent or guilty is almost a secondary consideration; the
prime focus now is that justice has not been seen to have been done.
It may help Mr Goff's deliberations to consider this
aspect. Ellis is no longer on trial, but in a sense the justice system is.
If New Zealanders are to continue to put their complete trust in it, they must
also believe that it will eventually produce the right result, no matter how
long it takes. Mr Goff does not need new evidence to
order a royal commission of inquiry - that is a political decision, not a legal
one.
Arthur Allan Thomas got his; now it is the turn of Peter Ellis. The argument
that it is time for everyone concerned to get on with their lives still holds,
but perhaps a commission of inquiry is needed to allow that to happen.