|
The
Dominion Post
August 9, 2003
As credible as abductions
Letter to the Editor
by Bernard Robertson (Karori)
Your editorial on
the Peter Ellis case (August 5) was little short of disgraceful, suggesting
that the integrity of the justice system can be preserved by sweeping these
matters under the carpet.
This, I suspect, is behind a lot of the current opposition to an inquiry. The
difference between the Ellis case and a lot of other so-called miscarriages
of justice is that if the Ellis conviction falls, a lot of other convictions
fall, too.
A recent Court of Appeal case ruling evidence inadmissible shows that psychologists
are still routinely giving nonsense evidence in court.
If you trouble to read the Court of Appeal decisions, you will see that each
was focused on specific evidence and suffered from procedural limitations.
Those limitations are the sort of thing one might expect journalists to be
interested in and campaign about.
Sir Thomas Eichelbaum went beyond his terms of reference in his conclusion
and if the process he followed had resulted in a judicial decision, it would
be thrown out on appeal as being one-sided. He was advised by a Canadian
"expert" in satanic ritual abuse, a subject that has about as much
credibility as alien abductions.
The whole point about the jury verdict is that the jury was hoodwinked by not
being allowed to see the evidence the public is now being shown. I thought
journalists were supposed to be interested in ferreting out the truth. What
value are you pursuing instead?
|
