|
|
The
Christchurch Civic Creche Case |
|
|
|
|
Just a few short months
ago Graham Capill was keen to portray himself as a pillar of the community.
Today, the former leader of the morals-based Christian Heritage Party is
behind bars, awaiting sentencing on a range of sex charges involving young
girls, including a representative charge of rape. Much of the
condemnation of Capill has focused on the hypocrisy that has characterised
his life for many years; the contrast between his public moralising and his
shameful private sexual predations. Yet although Capill was a hypocrite, even
more worthy of censure is his betrayal of the trust this so-called champion
of moral values sought from the community throughout his public life. Capill revelled in his
public prominence, enjoying the power that accompanied his former position as
the most visible face of a basic and often patriarchal Christian morality in
New Zealand. Whenever a moral issue hit the news, Capill could invariably be
counted on to issue pronouncements and denouncements as to the righteousness
or evil involved. Perhaps he was also drawn to his recent career as a police
prosecutor by the opportunity if not to make judgments, then at least to
level charges in a courtroom. The story behind his
offending has yet to emerge, but perhaps his case illustrates the dangers
that can arise when a religious or political leader is obsessed with his own
importance and image. Capill's determination to be always in the limelight
and his often sanctimonious, holier than thou attitude had, by the time he
quit Christian Heritage in 2003, alienated even some members of his own
party. Much more disturbingly,
his sense of power seems to have persuaded him that he had the right, over a
period of years, to disregard his own moral utterances and society's
abhorrence of sexual abuse to commit his crimes against young girls. Capill's position as an
influential community figure and morals advocate might also have protected
him from earlier exposure by his victims. Making a complaint of sexual abuse
is never easy for the victim, but it becomes even more daunting when the
perpetrator is such a respected person that the accusation would seem
unbelievable. In this there is a
parallel with the disgraced Morgan Fahey, despite his sexual offences not
being directed at young girls. Fahey had also been a highly respected and
trusted figure in Christchurch, due to his popularity and status as a family
doctor and his prominence in local body politics, where he had served as
Christchurch's deputy mayor. But he abused his trust and power with some of
his patients and, such was his influential position in society, it took a
news media sting operation to expose him. A lesson of both the
Capill and Fahey cases is that those who do wield power are quite capable of
abusing it and that no-one, therefore, must be above scrutiny. Capill's case has
aroused strong emotions in Christchurch, as shown by the volume of letters
about it to this newspaper. Aside from his self-evident hypocrisy and
betrayal of trust, some Christians fear that they will be tarred with
Capill's brush. After the Fahey and Peter Ellis trials, his offending might
also cause some to worry why the city appears to so often have high-profile
cases of sexual offending. Next month Capill will
be sentenced on the serious charges to which he has pleaded guilty. Some
might think that not putting his victims through the added trauma of an
extended trial should be a mitigating factor in the length of any prison term
that may be imposed. Any pity for Capill on this score would be misplaced,
given the impact his offending would have already had on his victims. Capill's sentence
should fully reflect society's revulsion at the extent and sordid nature of
his crimes against vulnerable young girls. It should be noted that when he pleaded
guilty to the first sexual assault charge he could have, but did not, reveal
the full extent of his other sexual crimes. His sentence must also be
commensurate with the enormous betrayal of trust which he sought from the
community and which he so grossly exploited. |
