August 4 2003
Ellis case adverts 'unfair' to kids
by Sid Pickering and NZPA
Commissioner for Children Roger McClay has criticised
a move to publish previously unheard children's evidence in the Peter Ellis
case.
Publisher Barry Colman paid more than $20,000 for an advertisement in a Sunday
newspaper containing children's testimonies, some of which were not played to
the jury that convicted Ellis in 1993 of molesting children in his care.
Mr McClay said Ellis had already been tested by the
justice system and found guilty. Publishing the testimony was unfair.
"It's easy to make a 4-year-old child look stupid," he said.
"I've met many parents of these children and I know that each time this
comes up it causes more trauma. It's a part of their
lives that they would like to forget."
Mr Colman said he would put entire interview transcripts from the case, which
led to seven years' jail for the former Christchurch Civic Creche worker, on a
website this week so the public can "make up its own mind".
But Justice Minister Phil Goff said the Crown Law Office assured him all tapes
and transcripts were made available to defence lawyers for cross-examination
purposes before the jury convicted Ellis.
He sought an opinion from the Crown Law Office after receiving an advance copy
of the advertisement, and was told it contained no new evidence.
The two-page spread, which asked whether Ellis is a child molester or victim of
a witch-hunt, included transcripts of some interviews by Child, Youth and
Family (CYF) staff not played to the jury.
These included a claim in October, 1992, by a 6-year-old boy, that he and other
youngsters were hanged in cages from a ceiling by Ellis' mother.
That was the boy's fifth interview and was in stark contrast to CYF's first interview with him, five months earlier, in
which the advertisement claims "all (he) could come up with was a memory
of Ellis cleaning him up on the creche changing table".
Excerpts from that interview were played to the jury.
Mr Goff said although the trial judge ruled against playing transcripts of
claims which did not lead to charges against Ellis, the jury was well aware
"that some of the material was bizarre and fanciful".