Allegations of Abuse
in Institutions |
|
|
|
The Australian courts have
permitted extradition of two clergymen to New Zealand to face sex
charges. PeterEllis.org hopes that our justice system will heed
Australian Justice Madgwick, who raised serious concerns that the men may not
receive a fair trial in New Zealand, spokesperson Richard Christie says. In particular ·
Will the two men receive separate trials from each other in New
Zealand? Joint trials would likely be regarded as unjust in Australia
and not occur. ·
Will the jury be given a strong warning by the judge as tothe very
real problems in meeting such old allegations? In Australia the accused
would have such a guarantee. ·
Will the two men face "representative charges"? Such
charges are not permitted in Australia, where Justice Madgwick quite rightly
pointed out: "How can a man defend himself if he doesnt know when the
alleged offence is supposed to have happened? ·
Will the jury be warned of the dangers associated with mass allegation
cases, including concoction or unconscious contamination of complainant
testimony? Many of the complainants were interviewed repeatedly by the
same psychiatrist and attended victims group sessions. ·
Will the jury be warned that the reliability of the complainants
evidence is hopelessly compromised by the tens of thousands of dollars
offered to anybody willing to claim that they were victims of
abuse? PeterEllis.org hopes that the New
Zealand Law Commission does not react to the extradition decision by
dismissing the concerns raised by Justice Madgwick about the New Zealand
justice system. The Commission could take the advice of Judith
Ablett-Kerr QC and seize the opportunity to examine the way Australia deals
with the issues, to see if we can improve our own system. |