|
|
Allegations
of Abuse in Institutions |
|
|
|
|
Wellington:
Court-awarded damages should not be like Lotto, a lawyer for Wellington nuns
being sued for $550,000 says. Making the Sisters of
Mercy pay damages would be like making parents pay damages for the way a
child was raised, which courts had always been reluctant to do except in
cases involving physical safety, Chris Finlayson told the High Court at
Wellington yesterday. A 45-year-old woman who
lived with the Sisters of Mercy at St Josephs Orphanage, Upper Hutt, from
1968-73, wants damages from four Roman Catholic organisations. The woman, whose name
is suppressed, says she was emotionally, verbally, physically and sexually
abused while in their care. She boarded at St Marys
College, also run by Sisters of Mercy, from 1974-76, and was a day girl in
1977. She has been granted
legal aid to sue the Sisters of Mercy (Wellington) Trust Board, St Josephs
Orphanage Trust Board, Wellington’s Roman Catholic Archdiocese, and its
social agency, Catholic Social Services. All four defendants
oppose the claim on factual and legal grounds. Mr Finlayson, who is
also lawyer for the orphanage trust board, told the court no damages were
justified, but if anything was awarded it should only be enough to put her
back in the position she would have been in had the alleged actions not taken
place. He said a major issue
would be whether they should be responsible for damage stemming from the
claimant’s poor early home life and her parents abandoning her. Damages were not some
kind of Lotto, he said. The claimant is a
beneficiary with two sons, and now lives in Australia. She has been diagnosed
as having various mental and emotional problems. Mr Finlayson said the
Sisters of Mercy Trust Board was to be judged according to the general
standard of the late 1960s and early 70s. The board stood behind
the actions of any sister, dead or alive. The former orphanage is
now a rest home. A former boarding
mistress at St Marys when the claimant was there, denied an assault alleged
by the claimant. The nun, whose name is
suppressed, said she felt sorry for the claimant when she did not know where Catholic
Social Services (CSS) had arranged to send her for school holidays. She was referred to a
CSS social worker’s file notes about the claimant, but said she did not
remember talking to the social worker about the claimant being
institutionalised, deprived or having behaviour problems. Earlier, one of the men
accused of sexually abusing the claimant told the court the allegation was
“absolute rubbish”. The man, whose name was
suppressed, said the allegations were completely untrue, beyond belief and
laughable. The woman said she was
raped after a drinking game, but he said there was no game, but he did
remember her being drunk on one occasion, and she vomited on the floor at his
house. Her brother took her home and the man cleaned the floor. The rape allegation was
absolute rubbish, he said. The claimant told the
court the man’s wife would sometimes invite her to visit her husband when he
was in bed and the claimant would masturbate him. The man said that never
happened and it was beyond belief his wife would suggest such a thing. The claimant’s lawyer
asked him about his fraud convictions. After answering several questions, the
man wanted to know how this was relevant to the claimant’s allegations.
Justice Frater said she had allowed the questions because his truthfulness
was in issue. He had not been told
his convictions would be raised when he agreed to give evidence, the man
said. He agreed he had been
convicted but denied actually committing any offences of dishonesty. He
denied telling lies. The woman who was the
claimant’s foster mother during the period of the alleged abuse told the
court the claimant never said she was being abused, or complained about CSS
or treatment at the orphanage or the Catholic schools she attended. The case is continuing. |
