|
The Press
September 2, 2003
Ellis case
Letter to the Editor
by Max Podstolski (Cashmere)
The children in the Ellis case should be believed, say N. Buchanan (August
30) and other anti-Lynley Hood campaigners.
Since false memories in their view have nothing to do with it, can they
explain the many patently absurd details in the children's transcripts, such
as being hung in cages? Ellis' mother was also mentioned -- does anyone
seriously believe she was guilty of ritual abuse too?
The onus is on the anti-Hood brigade to say whether they believe absolutely
everything the children said actually happened, or only some of it.
If everything, then common sense tells us they must be overly credulous to
the point of self-delusion. If only some, that would be to admit that the
children's accounts were contaminated by suggestive questioning.
The only rational conclusion is that the children's testimony was
fundamentally flawed, which casts considerable doubt on Ellis' conviction.
Merely to repeat "there's no smoke without fire" is unconvincing.
|
