|
|
Allegations of Abuse
in Institutions |
|
A former Salvation Army officer
holds fast to denials of sex acts alleged at Bramwell Booth Children's Home.
The former Salvation Army officer accused of sex charges against children at
the Temuka home 30 years ago denied the allegations when he gave evidence in
the High Court at Timaru yesterday. On the seventh day of his trial
John Francis Gainsford, 69, retired, of Auckland, continued to strongly deny
all but four of the 27 charges involving eight complainants. He also denied many of the
incidents the court has heard about in recent days had even occurred. Gainsford's counsel Paul Dacre
told the jury the accused had behaved badly towards some of the children and
he acknowledged that with the four guilty pleas (to three charges of indecent
assault on a girl aged under 12 and a charge of inducing a girl then aged 12
to do an indecent act on him). Gainsford admitted indecently
touching the girls while giving them piggybacks. In another incident he could not
recall removing the girl's underwear in the drying room and indecently
assaulting her but accepted it had occurred and had pleaded guilty to that
charge. While he had pleaded guilty to
inducing a girl to do an indecent act on him, Gainsford said the complainant
(who was aged under 12) had climbed on to his lap and rubbed herself against
him, arousing him. He had not dissuaded her from doing so. On another
occasion he said the girl rubbed against him when he was in bed, with the
same outcome. Gainsford's responses to the
remaining 23 indecency and rape charges were all similar, stating simply
"no" when asked if he could recall the incident, or stating
"it did not" (happen). He denied indecently assaulting
girls when they were in the bath, adding a female staff member was usually
there at bath time. He could not recall an incident in
which one of the girls claimed she had woken to find her nightwear
rearranged, and he was in the room. She told the court she had locked herself
in the toilet after the incident. When questioned by a senior
Salvation Army officer about abuse complaints in late 1974, Gainsford denied
any penetration had taken place. He denied the three rape and one
attempted rape charges when Mr Dacre read them to him yesterday. Witnesses had said he would go
into their rooms wearing a night shirt, and would raise his arms to reveal
his genitals, but Gainsford said that was not possible. He still had the night shirt, and
when he carried out an "experiment" lifting his arms, his penis was
not visible. Asked by Tim Gresson (for the
Crown) whether all the complainants and witnesses were either mistaken or had
given false evidence, Gainsford said he could only assume they were mistaken,
but he did not believe they had deliberately lied. Gainsford denied the sexual abuse
had been much more extensive and that he was simply in denial. "I am quite positive it is
not. It is firmly imprinted on my mind. I had to answer to the Salvation Army
and the Department of Social Welfare." To Mr Gresson's suggestion that
Gainsford had a problem with self control when it came to children, Gainsford
replied he had never had a problem with little boys, but for a brief period
did have a problem with four little girls (of whom three were complainants in
the trial). "I felt devastated when I read about it (read their
statements), ashamed about it.'' Gainsford suggested the
complainants' memories may have hung on to things they imagined at the time
and were now remembering as reality. The final crown witness yesterday said
that as a teenager he ran into the staff lounge one night to find Gainsford
sitting in the dark with his trousers down, and his hand between the legs of
a young girl who was sitting with her legs spread across him. The girl was
one of the complainants in the trial. "We knew we had seen
something we should not have seen,'' he said, adding they quickly left the
room. He said they must have told other residents because a couple of days
later the assistant manager wanted to know exactly what he had seen, adding
he would take care of the matter. The witness said the incident
happened in either March or April, at least nine months before Gainsford left
the home. Told by Gainsford's counsel Paul
Dacre that Gainsford could not recall the incident, the witness replied it
had happened, it was a matter of fact, and both boys had seen it. Later,
under cross examination, Gainsford admitted while he did not recall the
incident, he accepted the man's evidence was "factually based''. The
trial before Justice Fogarty and a jury of three men and nine women continues
this morning. |
