|
The |
|
|
All names amended to match the
pseudonyms used in A City Possessed Part D Lara Palm (DoB Jan 86?) Age at first interview 6yrs 2 mo
1.1 Interviewer: a) Frequent use of closed, suggestive and/
or multiple choice questions b) Use of dolls, toys and drawing to
demonstrate experiences c) Interviewer briefed by mother 1.2 Possible sources of external
contamination: a) Parental questioning possibly repeated
over time b) Mother has helped re possible location
of building (City Council) c) Attends school with other former creche
children, visits another. d) May be attending counselling with a
person named Hildegard 1.4 Child's demeanour: a) Quiet spoken, sometimes whispers. b) No overt displays of emotion or
distress. c) At times appears tired or bored. 2.0 Interview 92 / 96
09.03.92 2.1 Allegation of Peter Ellis inserting
penis in Lara's mouth. 2.1.1
Lara initially (pp6-7) makes a
complaint that Peter [presumably' Ellis] tickled her on her feet and tummy,
and that this was 'scary' because he kept doing it and didn't stop. 2.1.2
Lara, when asked who Peter is (p7),
described him as "..a very mean man and he wants children to feel
scared.", and that she felt "scared" (p7). A suggestive
question followed, "...the tickling made you feel scared of
him?"(p7). Lara was given a doll, and identified (p8) tummy, backs, neck
as tickling sites. She stated (p9) that Peter was avoided when he tried to
tickle and that creche staff (Debbie and Jan) had been told, but that Peter
continued to do it. 2.1.3
Lara's next complaint was that Peter
took and ate a gherkin from her lunch box. 2.1.4
She then made the following
allegation (p10), "He did some things that he calls drinking games, and he
went into the toilets and one day he had said he had lollies in his pocket to
give children, but he didn't, he really just um had, he'd really did went in
and he made children put Peter's penis in their mouth." Asked how she
knew this, she replied "Because I was there and he made them and did it
to me." Lara went on to say that one of the workers, Marie knew this had
happened, "Because she um was just going into the door of the toilets to
check what Peter was doing and she saw him putting um his penis, making
children put his penis in their mouth.". Asked how she knew Marie had
seen it, Lara said, "Because um I was, I ran out and I telled her
that."(p10). (Note: Given the
seriousness of this allegation, presumably Marie could validate the claim
that she was told by Lara and that she saw the event described.). 2.1.5
Lara stated (p11) that two other
children, a Bart and Mary, were present in the toilets too. The location was
identified as, "It was just in the area where the toilets were." (Note: A plan of the toilet area would
help establish the layout and give some insight into the environment in which
the alleged events occurred in order to explicate the potential for such
behaviours to occur generally undetected by other children or staff coming to
the area without warning.). 2.1.6
Asked how many times it went into
her mouth, Lara replied, "It went in lots of days, it went in for lots
of days."; "It went in lots of times in one day." (p11). She
described it as tasting "A bit yucky."; and "Horrible."
(pH ); "And it made us feel scared and we wanted to tell someone."
(p12). The interviewer suggested that Lara had told Marie (Note: The interviewer assumed that
this statement related to the occasion referred to in 2.1.4 above and
suggested Marie. This may or may not have been the case, an open-ended
question would have allowed the child to say to whom she had told.). Lara
said that Marie had said "...alright then, I'll try and stop Peter doing
that, and she tried to but he pretended not to listen again.". (Note: Presumably, Marie could confirm
this). 2.1.7
In describing where Ellis' hands
were, Lara said, "He just holding us on the shoulders to makes sure um
that we were all still and that, but.." (p12). (Note: At this stage no contextual information is sought, in terms
of the relative positions of the children to Ellis during the alleged event,
whether he and / or they were seated or standing, whether the events occurred
one at a time with individual children or whether the other children Lara
says were involved also were present in the toilet area before and/or after
it happened to her, and whether she saw it happening to others before or
after it happened to her.). 2.1.8
Asked about Peter's clothes, Lara
described his underwear and trousers unzipped and pulled down around his
ankles and his top pulled up (p12) and "making" the children put
his penis in their mouth. (Note:
No information was obtained on how the children were 'made' to perform this act,
and whether Ellis inserted the penis or the children were somehow made to
apply their mouth to his penis.). In response to direct, suggestive
questioning (p13), "Yeah, did it move or stay still?"; "And
was it um soft or hard or floppy or hanging down or..?", Lara selected,
"It stayed still." and "Floppy and hanging down.". "Floppy and
hanging down. Was it always floppy and hanging down?"(p13), to which
Lara responded, "Um it was, always was floppy and hanging down.". (Note: If this description is at all
accurate, the questions that arise relate to the relative body positions and
locations, and to how the flaccid penis was inserted into the child's mouth,
given that this could be a difficult exercise?). Asked what Peter was doing
in the toilets with the children (p13), Lara replied, "Um he was trying
to make us put his penis in our mouth." (p14). Comment: Given that the alleged events reportedly involved
a number of children being assaulted on numerous occasions, in the toilet
area (rather than in the toilet cubicles), that Ellis had his pants around
his ankles, and that Lara reported them to a staff member who observed the
event and remonstrated with Ellis, the chances of his being caught in the act
and/or reported to authorities seem extremely high. Ellis' penis is described
as flaccid and still while inserted. No detail was sought or obtained on
critical aspects of context such as relative body positions, how the penis
was inserted and retained in the child's mouth, or whether anything such as
urination or ejaculation occurred. 2.2 Allegation of indecent assault: 2.2.1
Asked a direct multiple-choice
question (p14), "Hmm mmm. Was he doing anything else in the toilets with
the kids or not?", Lara replied, "He was touching our private
parts.", which she identified as "Bottom and clitoris.", with
his hands. (Note: The use of the
anatomical term clitoris is unusual by a child of this age in the writer's
experience and suggests specific anatomical education, if not some' sex
education.) In response to direct questions, Lara indicated that this had
been done to "Um all what children that were there in the toilet.",
"It happened to 2.2.2
Lara stated Ellis had used his hands
and fingers on top of her clothes (p15) and demonstrated very brief touching
on a doll. 2.2.3
Asked (p16), "Okay, was it
always on top of your pants?", Lara added to her initial allegation,
"Yeah, but sometimes when we were on the toilet he sometimes did secret
touching then too?". She alleged touching of genitalia and bottom. To
suggestive multiple choice questions she said it felt sore when she went to
the toilet and that Ellis had threatened her as follows, "He just said
don't tell your parents or else you'll turn into a gherkin and get eaten
up."(p17), stating (p18) that this had inhibited her from telling her
parents until recently when her parents had asked her to tell. Lara noted that on the previous night her
mother had asked her if she had wanted to talk about Peter and she had. (Note 1: The threat apparently had not
stopped her from telling creche workers) (Note 2: The form and content of parental questioning can be
problematic if it is at all suggestive and / or includes reinforcement
(reward) for telling because the process may contaminate subsequent evidence
and result in rehearsal of inaccurate information that then appears to be
provided spontaneously in any subsequent evidential context.) 2.2.4
Lara, when asked to demonstrate
(p19) on a doll just how she had been touched appeared briefly to place a
finger in the groin area on each occasion. In response to a suggestive
multiple-choice question, "Did his hands move or stay still?", said
"They just went like that [quickly puts finger on doll's groin] and his
hands moved [action on doll does not show this movement].". 2.2.5
Lara said that when the touching
stopped, "He pulled them [pants and underpants] up and zipped them up
again and he then walked out of the toilets and took us with him."
(p19). (Note: This description
implies that there was more than one child involved at any one time). Comment: This allegation arose as a result of direct,
suggestive questioning. There was little attempt to ascertain the
circumstances or context in relation to the preceding allegation. Further,
there was no attempt to explore the alleged associated physical abuse. The
questioning on key points often involved use of direct and/ or suggestive
multiple-choice questions rather than on having the child provide some
narrative account. There is an implication
that Ellis had his clothing down, but the interviewer takes no steps to
clarify whether this alleged event is separate from or concurrent with the
previously alleged penis in the mouth incident, when she alleged his pants
and underwear were taken down (p12). Lara also implies that this took place
in a toilet cubicle while the child was on the toilet, whereas the previous
allegation specified the 'toilet area', further she used the plural 'us',
suggesting that there were numbers of children present. It is difficult,
without knowing the layout of the toilet area, to ascertain how possible
events such as those described might be under the conditions described by the
child. An expected behavioural
effect of repeated sexual and physical abuse on the children by Ellis would
be either increased resistance to attending the creche by the children or an
evident avoidance of him or aversion toward him. This issue seems not to
arise or to be explored by the interviewer. Further, one might have
anticipated some difficulty or emotion with discussing painful recollections,
but no difference is really evident when these are dealt with in the
interview. 2.3 Allegations of 'secret touching' and
physical abuse outside the gate. 2.3.1
Lara alleged (p19) that the children
were taken from the toilet to "outside the gate" (p19), where
further "secret touching" had occurred. It transpired that this
"secret touching" involved tickling (p19) on the tummy and back
(p20). Asked "Is that secret touching or a different sort of
touching?", Lara said "Different sort...", and went on to
allege, "...and he also hitted us and kicked us to hurt us so we tried
to go inside."(p20). Comment: Lara does not always discriminate, in her use of
the term 'secret touching', between non sexual and sexual touching. The
interviewer made no attempt to explore this alleged incident or the
allegation of physical abuse. As a consequence the allegation hangs in the
air and there is no way to place it in any sort of context or to test it's
validity, despite the fact that it leaves a negative impression that Ellis
may have been doing other harmful things. No evidence of emotional distress
was apparent in relating these events. 2.4 Revisiting allegations of indecent
'secret touching': 2.4.1
The interviewer introduces the topic
of being touched on the bottom (p20). Of note here is further evidence of Lara's
sophisticated anatomical knowledge because, when asked where the poohs comes
out she says, "Your anus."(p20). The interviewer asks a leading
question, "Okay. And so what, whereabouts did his hand go?", to
which Lara replied, "On our bottom.". A further leading question
was posed, "Did it go near the anus or not?", and answered,
"No." (p20). The response then was changed to "It went over
the anus." (p21). Comment: This additional detail was obtained primarily by
leading and/or suggestive questioning. Lara evidenced no change in emotion
when giving these details. 2.5 Revisiting the allegation of insertion
of penis in mouth: 2.5.1
The interviewer returns to this
allegation (p21) to check how Lara knew it had happened to other children.
She responded, "Because I was there when it happened to them." and
identified three children, Kari, Mary, and Bart (p21). ( Note: Previously (p11, see 2.1.5 above) only two children (Mary
and Bart) were identified). When asked how she felt when she saw it being
done to Bart she stated, "Um I went over and thought about [inaudible]
and whispered in his ear that we could run out and tell the other creche
workers.". Asked, "And did you do that or not?", she replied,
"We did that." Asked "And who did you tell?", she
identified, "Debbie and sometimes Marie and some times Jan and
Gaye.". Asked, "How many times did you tell the creche
workers?", she replied, "About [pause] Lots of times." (p20).
Asked to describes the words used in telling Lara responded, "Peter is
doing secret touching to us. Could you please help us to stop him. And so we
went in and lie, and they tried to help us stop him, but he just kept on
pretending not to listen and he kept on doing it.". Comment: The question arises as to why the interviewer
failed to determine any detail of this scenario. No effort was made to
determine the context in which Lara spoke to Bart (e.g., where she was
standing what Bart was doing or whether Ellis was aware of this, given that
young children's whispers often are audible to others in the vicinity).
Neither was any effort made to ascertain how Ellis had reacted to their
departure, given that he allegedly is standing in the toilet area with his
pants around his ankles (p12, see 2.1.8 above). No mention was made of the
earlier statement (p10 see 2.1.4 above) that Marie had been alerted by Lara
alone and had come to see, which appeared to conflict with the current
description and what was said to be told to an apparent array of teachers
(p21). It is also unlikely that a child would remember with any precision
words allegedly used at least two years previously, so that specific
restatements such as this should be viewed with some caution. 2.6 Again returning to the allegation of
alleged indecent touching: 2.6.1
After ascertaining the child's
knowledge of the relative location and functions of the clitoris and vagina
(pp24-25) the interviewer probed directly, using a number of multiple choice
questions, where Ellis' hand had gone with respect to her vagina. Lara
indicated [twice] that his hand did not go near her vagina, nor inside that
part of her body (p25). Her response to a leading question, "...So did,
The hand went on the clitoris?", was "Yes." (Note: Given the sensitivity of the
clitoris to indirect touching on even the outer labia, actual touching of the
clitoris, compared say with stroking of the outer labia, might well make for
a difficult discrimination for a child, so that the actual detail of any
alleged touching has to be carefully considered in the writer's opinion. The interviewer
does not obtain any particular detail). 2.7 Attempt to ascertain where 'secret
touching' came from: 2.7.1
In response to specific questions
(p26), Lara explained that Peter Ellis used the term secret touching and
that, "Um, he calls it secret touching just before he's going to do
it.", asked what he says, she replied, "He says um that he's going
to do some secret touching. We don't know what secret touching is and so we
just follow him." (Note:
Clearly this could be true for the first occasion only, thereafter one might
expect the children to not follow when this invitation was given.). 2.7.2
Asked if she had heard the term
anywhere else, she said at home (p26) and answered "No." when asked
if anywhere else. She changed this to add "And at other creches just
tell us.. [No record on transcript, but possibly].. about it too." She
said her parents had told her at home, and in response to a specific question
alleged Peter had first told her it was called that. Comment: No effort was made establish the circumstances in
which Ellis talked about 'secret touching', whether it was out in the creche
proper or once children were in the toilet area. Nor was the circumstances of
the children following him when he told them it was to happen. Without some
sort of context, the information makes little sense. Similarly, there was no
evident attempt to determine just what her parents had told Lara and the
circumstances of their telling her, or of the circumstances in which she was
told at 'other creches' and whether this preceded or post-dated the
allegations, all of which could be important given the potential for
contamination of evidence and/or the possible effect on memory source
monitoring, given the alleged events occurred at least two years previously. 3.0 Conclusion: Lara
began the interview expressing some minor concerns re Ellis' behaviour and
then alleged that he had made her put his flaccid penis in her mouth and
those of other children on many occasions and many times a day. She referred
to "drinking games" (WO) but made no allegation concerning
urination or ejaculation in her mouth, nor was this explored by the
interviewer. At no time was any clear information sought or obtained on the
context of this alleged behaviour, of the disposition of the observing or
participant children, or of how the penis got into their mouths. The location
was specified as the 'toilet area' as distinct from a toilet cubicle, which
must increase the 'public' nature of the activities. The child alleged that
specific children were involved and identified four creche workers who had
been told, including one (Marie) whom she said had come and seen what was
happening and spoken to Ellis about his behaviour. Lara claimed that the
behaviour continued despite this. What this
requires, if true, is Ellis taking enormous risks of detection, continuing
after detection, and a conspiracy of silence by a number of the staff
concerning his activities. In
response to specific questioning, allegations also were made of touching the
children's genital and anal regions in the toilets and 'outside the gate',
and of hitting and kicking the children. Again, little detail of the
circumstances of these allegations was obtained, as was any clear information
on whether these were separate from or concurrent with the alleged
penile-oral activities. The tern 'secret touching' seems to apply to both
genital and non-genital touching (e.g. tickling). In
giving detail, Lara demonstrated unexpectedly sophisticated anatomical
terminology, using terms such as clitoris, identified by her as distinct from
vagina, and anus, which the writer has not heard used even by much older
children in evidential interviews. This bespeaks of an unusual degree of
knowledge and some education in these matters, and raises the question of how
this might have affected her testimony. It is evident that there has been
discussion with, and possibly questioning by her parents, which raises
concerns about possible contamination. There
are few indications of any emotional reactions in this interview. Lara speaks
quietly much of the time, and she occasionally whispers when asked for
detail. Much of the information is presented in a matter-of-fact way. 4.0 Interview 92/594 0610.92 4.1 Revisiting allegation of insertion of
penis in children's mouths: 4.1.1
As with the first interview, this
began with Lara stating some general complaints of a minor nature about Ellis
before reiterating a version of her initial allegations, "Um. Well he
made children put his penis in their mouths and he made them do mean things
to each other, and they tickled children, and he tickled children and they
didn't like it."(p7). The tickling was described occurring between
children, in the creche area and as being on tummies and on legs (by knees)(pp7-8).
(Note: This is different from the
initial allegations (Interview 92/96) in that this child-child activity was
not previously mentioned nor was the 'secret touching' referred to on the
present occasion). 4.1.2
Leading into the topic of the
genital-oral contact, the interviewer asked where it happened. This time Lara
responded, "In the toilets." (Note:
In interview 92/ 96 she had specified "the area where the toilets
were" (Transcript p11). 4.1.3
The interviewer leads as follows
(p9), "He got the kids to put his penis.."; "In their
mouths..", and asked "...Who was in the toilets when that
happened?" Lara responded, "Um, most.of the children.". (Note: In interview 92/96 she had
named two (Bart and Mary, pH) and then three (Kari, Mary and Bart, p21) as
present). 4.1.4
Now asked (p9) who knew what he was
doing Lara responded, "Gaye.", asked how she knew, Lara replied,
"Because when he was doing that she peeped round the door";
"She saw him doing it.". Challenged, she said she had seen Gaye
doing this. (Note: In interview
92/96 (p10) Lara first maintained she had told Marie, and that Marie had
looked and seen, she later (p21) had added Debbie, Jan and Gaye to the list
and said she and Bart had told.). 4.1.5
Asked what Gaye did about this, Lara
reported as follows, "She um didn't tell any of the other creche workers
but when Peter got out of the toilets she said don't do that and Peter said
Oh yes I will and then he went back in the toilets with the children and
started doing it again."(p10). Asked how she knew Gaye had said anything
to Peter, Lara stated, "Um because we were out of the toilets and we
heard Gaye, I heard Gaye say it to Peter and Peter took us back to the
toilet."(p10). Asked if any of the other creche workers knew what Peter
was doing to children in the toilets, Lara responded "No.". The
interviewer noted (p10) a discrepancy between this and what had been said in
the preceding interview (92/96) and asked who else Lara had told. She named
Debbie (p10) and was asked if she had told any of the other creche teachers
or not, Lara replied'"No because I heard Debbie tell some of the creche
workers." (p10). (Note 1: This is an entirely different description of the creche
worker-Ellis interactions and subsequent events from that given by Lara in
Interview 92/96, p10, pp21-22. Note 2:
In interview 92/96, Lara stated she had told other workers (p21), naming
Gaye, Marie, Jan and Debbie. Note 3:
At the end of this interview (92/594, p20), Lara is asked again if the person
who saw was Gaye, she affirmed this. She was reminded that last time she had
said Marie, and said she could not remember. The interviewer suggested that
Lara is now more sure it was Gaye, to which Lara agreed). 4.1.6
Probing with suggestive and direct questions
the interviewer attempted to identify other creche staff whom Lara had told
(pp 11-12). Lara identified Marie as one. Asked what she had told Marie, she
replied' "I said that I saw Gaye peeping around the door and that Gaye
knew what was happening to her children.". (Note: This exchange is completely different from that referred to
in interview 92/96 (p10). Also, the reported conversation took place over two
years previously and Lara had just demonstrated that she could not accurately
recall what she had said in an interview only seven months previously). 4.1.7
Asked specifically about Andrew
(p12), another creche worker, Lara said, "Well, I can't remember
Andrew.", "Do you remember what he looks like?",
"No.", "So how do you know he was a teacher then?",
"Because mummy telled me and then I remembered a wee bit of him but I
couldn't, couldn't remember all about him." (Note: This latter statement raises issues of possible
contamination from parental sources. The question has to be asked, just what
else has her mother told her?). 4.1.8
Later (p13) the question of Gaye
seeing the alleged event is raised in specific questioning, the interviewer
checking Lara's certainty, to which Lara replied, "Um, I'm very
sure."; "Hmm Hm. What makes you very sure about that?",
"Because I just think I can remember her peeping.". Comment: There are many differences and discrepancies
between the information given in the present interview and that in 92/96.
Lara appears fairly certain of her revised statement of who she recalls
telling, adding conversational and action detail that appears to validate her
claim, but which increases the divergence between the two separate reports.
It is important to contrast the two different statements because although she
is reporting events alleged to have occurred at least two to two and a half
years previously, in the process she demonstrates that her memory for what
she has said only seven months prior is not particularly good, raising
questions about the effect of an even longer delay on the accuracy of her
memory. There is some concern
over the assistance she claims her mother has given her in remembering about
'people involved in the creche. It raises the question of what other
assistance and questioning has occurred. As in the first interview,
Lara described events with no evident emotion or distress. 4.2 Revisiting 'secret touching outside
the gate. 4.2.1
The interviewer led the child into
the topic with a direct reminder of this allegation(p14). Asked where outside
the gate, Lara said it was just near the gate, on the footpath, just outside
the gate near the creche. It transpired that the 'secret touching' involved
tickling "All over their body." (p14). The interviewer specifically
told Lara that 'secret touching' was different from tickling and asked
whether what was done here was the one or the other. "He did
tickling." (Note: In
interview 92/96, Lara had difficulty with this discrimination). 4.3 Allegations involving 'secret
touching' in the building with escalators: 4.3.1
The interviewer asked a series of
specific questions re visits outside the creche. Lara specifically stated
(p15) that Peter did not take the children to parks (Note: This contrasts with claims by other children interviewed (e.g.,
Eli Laurel, 92/163) that Ellis had taken them to the park). Asked where Peter
did take her, she replied, "Um down um in the big room with lots of
escalators. My mummy thinks that it could have been the City Council or
something.". (Note: This
raises the question of how much else Lara's mother had been helping her to
remember, adding to concerns about potential contamination of memory.) Asked
what happened there, Lara alleged, "He did the secret touching." (Note: Given the earlier confusions
between tickling and secret touching, one might have anticipated some attempt
at clarification). 4.3.2
Apparently, from Lara's description,
Ellis was alone when this occurred (p16), and was accompanied by children
from both ends of the creche, all had walked there. (Note: Presumably this meant some children present who were aged
under four years of age). The touching allegedly occurred, "Um, just in
the middle of the room. (p17)", with "Yes, there was um lots of
people just working at their desks."; "Where they worked at the
City Council." (p17). (Note
1: These people were not identified as present originally (p16), but now
apparently are present. Note 2:
The location appears to have become more definitely the City Council, which
supports concern about contamination of memory by suggestion.). 4.3.3
The location of the alleged 'secret
touching now was explored with Lara. (pp17-18). She immediately redefined it
as 'tickling', locating it on the tummy, legs [a doll is produced to assist],
chest (p17) and (p18) neck [not reported in transcript]. At this point (p18)
the interviewer specifically suggested to Lara that she show on the doll
where Peter did 'secret touching'. Lara pointed to the front an the back of
the doll and for back is told by the interviewer, "And I know that your
name for those are Bottom, or is it bum?"(p18), Lara responded
"Bottom.". "Bottom. And this one's called the..",
"Vagina." The interviewer then asked, "Vagina, Ok. Right, so
when he did secret touching on your vagina and your bum, whereabouts were
you?", "Um, in the City Council.". Comment: Here one can see an allegation of indecent assault
apparently being generated by the association of a non-sexual allegation
(tickling) in an identified setting with exposure to specific questions about
sexually-related body parts and a further question that specifically states
that sexual touching occurred and then asks where that happened. In this way
an allegation and a memory may be created. Certainly, in the writer's
opinion, this type of questioning can do no more than confound an already
confused situation with the potential for misleading and possibly false
memories being generated. Further, this child has already previously
demonstrated in this and the previous (92/96) interview that she confuses
tickling and 'secret touching', which should have added to the caution of the
interviewer in introducing suggestive questions The question needs to
be asked as to whether either the tickling or the alleged indecent assault
would have gone unreported had it occurred, as Lara claimed (p17) in front of
lots of people sitting at their desks. 4.4 Naming additional children allegedly
involved in 'secret touching': 4.4.1
Asked to name other children
present, Lara identified Brian, Colin Kauri, Bart, Zelda and Kari (Note 1: Brian was identified as a
family friend whom Lara had visited in their farm. Note 2: Colin Kauri was named previously only in association with
face-painting. Note 3: Previously,
of these children, Lara had only named Bart and Kari as being involved). 5.0 Conclusions: This
second interview, like the first, began with relatively minor, non-abusive
complaints about Ellis. Of the substantive sexual abuse allegations made in
interview 92/ 96, only that relating to penile-oral contact was spontaneously
repeated. Subsequently, quite different detail was given concerning this
allegation, much of it conflicting with that in the initial allegation,
including specific place, children involved, and staff informed and what was
said. These differences and discrepancies between the two interviews are
significant and problematic, since they raise the question of the validity of
the initial allegation and the stability of Lara's memory, given that the
previous interview was only seven months before and the alleged remembered
events occurred over two years previously. They also raise the importance of
understanding the content of a sequence of interviews, where more than one
has been undertaken, since selective viewing or analysis would not enable an
awareness of discrepancies or differences. There
were no indications of emotional or distressed behaviour during the statement
of these allegations. 6.0 Interview 92/694 09.12.92 6.1
Former Creche children whom Lara said were at her school: 6.1.1
In response to a direct question
(Transcript p3), Lara named five former creche children at her school (Nancy,
Prue, Bart, Eli, and Fred). (Note:
No detail of her contact with these children was obtained. The possibility of
contact, sharing of stories, and possible contamination cannot be ruled
out.). 6.2 Allegation of penis-mouth contact at
the building with escalators: 6.2.1
As with the two previous interviews,
Lara began (pp4-5) by relating some minor non-sexual (but different)
complaints about Ellis' conduct. Invited to speak about some mean things that
Peter Ellis did, Lara repeats that it included being made to put his penis in
'our' mouth (p6). This was identified as 'secret touching'. Told by the
interviewer that she had, in the preceding interview, told her about secret
touching happening somewhere else, Lara located it in a room with "lots
of escalators", "And it had carpet on the floor and it had some
desks in it."(p6). (Note:
This appears to be the building identified as the City Council in interview
92/ 594, pp16-18) 6.2.2
Asked who was present (p6), Lara
named Peter, Fred, Eli, and Bart. (Note
1: The children had been among those named a little earlier (p3) as being at
her school. Note 2: In interview
92/594, no children were named, and it was said then that those present came
from the Womble and [presumably) Big ends of the Creche (p16)). 6.2.3
Asked "Were there any other big
people there?", Lara said, "No.". (Note: In interview 92/594 she had said "There were lots of
people working at their desks.") 6.2.4
Asked what sort of secret touching
occurred in this room, Lara stated (p7), "Oh, he made us put his penis
in his mouth and he made us run around the room and then he came back and
touched us.", and, later, "Well he made us run round the room and
then he ran after us touching us." (Note:
This is an entirely new allegation). 6.2.5
A question of how many times she
went there [presumably to the building with the escalators], Lara replied
"Um, just once." (p7). 6.2.6
Clarification was sought (p8) about
the 'touching', which Lara then described as tickling on the tummy. (Note: Lara in previous interviews has
not made clear discriminations of secret touching and tickling). 6.2.7
The interviewer asked if Lara was
touched anywhere else when running around the room and responded
"No." (p8) (Note: In
interview 92/594, p18, Lara had been led to allege touching on the vagina and
bottom. This allegation is not repeated at this time). 6.2.8
In a series of leading question the
interviewer has Lara agree that the penis in the mouth happened in "that
room" and in the creche toilets, "So it happened in two different
places.."(p8). (Note: By
using leading questions the interviewer denied an 6.2.9
The suggestive questioning continued
(pp8-9) in respect of other locations, "...So tell me, um has Peter
taken you anywhere else before and done secret touching or not?" (p8).
Lara answered (p9), "No.", "When Peter took you to a place,
took you somewhere else and did secret touching"..."have there ever
been other people there or not?", Lara answered, "Just me and Peter
and other children.". (Note:
This is not consistent with 92/594, p17) 6.2.10
The interviewer then applies social
influence, "And other children, right. Cos l heard, ah, I heard there might have been other people there
one time, is that right?" In response, Lara changed her statement
to, "Um, yep, yeah." (p9). 6.2.11
When challenged (p9) about the change
in evidence, Lara amended her detail, "Well there were three
rooms and one..";"..Two of them had no people in them.";
"And then except me and Peter and other children."; "And then
there's another one that did have staff in it."; "Um like the staff
that work on the computers.". (Note:
This description bears no relation to that offered in 92/594, p17). 6.2.12
The interviewer asks a series of
suggestive questions (p10) about these people, none of whom are apparently
involved in 'secret touching'. (Note:
The interviewer does not ascertain whether, as in 92/594, these people
witnessed anything of a sexual nature). 6.2.13
The interviewer asked (p10) directly
whether Peter knows any other people who do secret touching. The answer was
assumed to be 'No'. 6.2.14
In response to further questioning
(pp10-12), Lara indicated that after the alleged event the children walked
back to the creche where she told Debbie, Gaye, and Marie, "Because I
didn't want to keep all that secret touching a secret.", and that other children
had told, "Because I saw them." (p11). Lara (p12) named Fred, Eli,
and .Bart. (Note: None of the
other children whose interviews the writer has examined have made a similar
allegation). Comment: The interviewer resorted often to closed,
suggestive and/or leading questions when trying to get detail. The
allegations made on the present occasion are quite different in major detail
from those made two months previously (92/594), with increased elaboration in
the face of challenge by the interviewer. Lara's responsiveness to suggestion
points to suggestibility, which, along with considerable inconsistency within
and across interviews, raises important questions about the reliability of
her statements. No emotional changes
when making allegations of a serious nature compared with other types of
allegation. 6.3 Others being told: 6.3.1
In response to direct questioning
(p13), Lara agreed that she had been telling her mother and Hildegard
[counsellor?] about what the interviewer called 'this stuff' (p13). She added
in response to a question about when at home with, "I um tell mummy and
daddy about the things." (p13). (Note:
This raises again the question of contamination of the child's narrative by
other questioning. The forms of question, the patterns of adult attention,
and the circumstances may all have a potentially contaminating effect on
reporting and memory.). 6.4 Allegation of 'secret touching' at
Peter's friend's house: 6.4.1
Using social influence the
interviewer introduced the possibility of other places and people being
involved in 'secret touching', "Um and I heard that there were
some other people somewhere doing some secret touching with
someone."(p14)., Lara replied, "Yes.". Later (p15) the
interviewer inquired, "When the other people were doing..";
"...secret touches to people, who did they do it to?", Lara named
Ken, Prue, Bart, Eli, and Fred (Note:
The latter three had been named previously in this interview in respect of
the "room" allegation). 6.4.2
"Yeah. And who were the people
doing the secret touching?", "Um, I don't know their names, but
there were three men."; "Right, so who took you to the three men,
how did you get there?" (Note:
At this stage it had not been established just where the three men had been.
Given that other children had alleged strangers doing things at or near the
creche, it is odd that the location was not ascertained before this
suggestive question was asked.). The answer was, "Um. We walked with
Peter." (p15). 6.4.3
Specific questions (p16) produced
statements to the effect that Lara did not know the men's names or what Peter
called them, that Peter had said they were going to see the three men, and
that she had seen them once only. Asked what they did (p16), Lara said they
had hit them on their backs with their hands and that they made the children
put their [the men's] penises in their [the children's] mouths. The penises
got there because the men unzipped their trousers (p17) 6.4.3
Asked to narrate events (p17), Lara
said they were in the room with the men and could not get out, despite trying
to, "And then I heard someone say that Junintelligible]..Well I heard
them say, I know what we're going to do, lets do some secret touching.".
(Note 1: This detail is remembered
after almost three years, and the statement attributed to the men is rather
child-like i n content. Note 2
There is no indication from Lara's demeanour that what is being related here
was traumatic, when recall of an inability to escape from a frightening situation
might reasonably be expected to produce some sign of distress from a child.) Comment: The interviewer made no attempt at this time to
examine the child's state of mind or emotion at the time of the alleged
events. Lara was relating alleged events which one might reasonably expect to
be traumatic, but no indication that they were so was evident in her
demeanour or behaviour. 6.4.4
In response to specific questioning
Lara said (p18) that this happened to her twice and in response to a
multiple-choice question about which men did it to her, selected "Um it
was the same person". In response to a further question, "Hmm. So
how many men have done it to you?" Lara gave the conflicting response,
"Just two." (Note: She
may have been including her earlier allegation re Peter Ellis, but the
interviewer made no attempt to clarify the discrepancy). 6.4.5
Lara alleged Peter was doing 'secret
touching' to Ken. When asked who she had told, she indicated her parents. (Note: The concern about possible
contamination again arises.). Lara is led to agree that she had not told her
parents when she was little (p18), she said this was, "Because I was
scared." (p19). 6.5 Allegation of penile-vulval contact by
the men: 6.5.1
The interviewer directly asked
"Ok. And did the men, the men who did the secret touching, did they put
the penis..","...in the kids' mouths, in your mouth?"(p19),
Lara answered (p20) in the affirmative. "Did the men's penis go anywhere
else on your body or not?", was answered "No." (p20). A body
parts diagram was produced and Lara indicated with crosses, and some
prompting suggestions from the interviewer, touching on the mouth and back
(p20). 6.5.2
Lara then waved the pen near the
groin area, to which the interviewer suggestively commented "...and what's
that there? What are you going to do? Is that something is that more touching
or you're just going to colour in? "What's that part called?"
(p20). Lara responded, "Vulva." (Note: Once again, as in earlier interviews, Lara used anatomical
terms which evidences a knowledge uncommon, in the writer's experience, for
children of this age.). This response was followed by a suggestive question,
"The vulva, right. Who touched your vulva?", Lara responded,
"The men.", "What did the men touch with?", "Their
penises.(p20) " (Note: In
response to a question posed minutes before, Lara had said that the men's
penises had not gone anywhere else on her body (see 6.5.1 above). Asked what
that made her vulva feel like she said "Ah, I can't
remember."(p21). Comment: The allegation of contact between penis and vulva
arose in the context of the presence of a body diagram and in the presence of
suggestive questioning. Rawls (1996) found that use of body diagrams and
closed (potentially suggestive) questions was associated with a high rate
(24%) of false allegation of abuse. That combination here also is likely to
be potentially problematic in terms of production of reliable evidence. It was noted that the
allegation was not accompanied by any change in emotion or demeanour. 6.5.3
Asked, "Hmm. Whereabouts were
your clothes when the men did.?", Lara said, "On our body."
When asked "So how did their penis touch your vulva?' (p21), she amended
her response to, "In our, ah, in my clothes were, trousers were down
here." to meet the challenge. 6.5.4 In response to direct questions, Lara
stated that Peter was touching the other child's secret and private parts (Note: She did not include herself
here.), and described the man who touched her vulva with his penis as,
"Um the man with the grt ey?]..With um black hair." (p21) (Note: Possible change in
description). and asked how many times that happened, said,
"Four.". 6.5.5
The interviewer led Lara through a
series of suggestive detail questions (pp22-23), that indicated that the men
had pulled her pants down (p22), that the penis stayed still on the vulva
(p22), and that she was standing up (p23) Asked how it happened when the
penis touched the vulva, Lara said the men had unzipped their jeans, taken
and their penis out. A suggestive multiple-choice question was asked about
their position, Lara chose "Standing up." from the options and
affirmed that she too was standing up. 6.5.6
The interviewer challenged the above
statement, "Right. Cos do you know what I think, because if a big man stands
up then the penis wouldn't be able to touch your vulva because you'd be much
littler. So how did the penis touch?"(p23). In response, Lara amended
her answer, "Um. Well, they were standing up like this and then they
went like that, squatted down." (Note
1: If they squatted, it is uncertain from relative body angles and the need
to retain balance, whether a penis could still touch a child's vulva with
ease. Note 2: There have been
other occasions on which Lara amended her story when challenged). 6.5.7
Asked (p24) what the man's penis
looked like, Lara replied matter-of-factly, "Just like a man's
penis.". Suggestive questions established that the penis was flaccid (Note: Even squatting, a flaccid penis
would not be easily brought into contact with a standing child's vulva). 6.5.8
Lara was willing (p24) to speculate
that Gaye was at creche in her office and that Debbie was with all of the
other creche workers at creche. 6.5.9
Lara was directly asked (p25) whose
vulva Peter touched. She now alleged that Peter had touched her vulva with
his penis (Note: Earlier (see
6.5.4 above) Lara had said only the man with the black hair, and had not
indicated Peter in respect of herself when asked what he was doing at that
time.) 6.5.10
Asked to describe the room (p27), Lara
said it contained some chairs and a book case. Asked (p28) about the books
she said they were about parties, and men, and road works (Note: The issue of speculation
arises, given that she was four years old, may not have been able to read,
and even so gives no indication that she took the books from the shelves.).
In response to specific questions Lara went on to describe pictures on the
walls of hills and parks (Note:
Would a frightened four year old in a strange house take in this detail?). 6.5.11
Volunteering to draw a picture of the
house (pp28-29), Lara described a two-storey house. Further questioning about
the house (p30) produced a description of a big hallway with pictures on the
walls of hills, parks and road works (Note:
The latter topic also was associate with the books). 6.5.12
The children were taken into the men's
bedroom(p31), they all slept in the same bed [Lara is playing with a toy bed
and dolls at this time]. The children were told to sit on the bed and the men
did secret touching (p31), the children having been made to take their
clothes off. The 'secret touching' in the bedroom transpired to involve
tickling (pp32-33). In response to a question about the other secret touching
(p33), Lara alleged it happened in the hallway ( Note: Earlier it was in a room, see 6.4 and 6.5 above). The
location of events subsequently (pp33-34) is the confusingly described as in
the bedroom, with children waiting in the hallway and taken to the bedroom
one by one. 7.0 Conclusion: This
interview included a number of revised and new allegations of abuse. The
reports in it of previously made allegations are different and divergent in
important ways from the allegations as initially made and there are also
internal inconsistencies which emerge as the questioning proceeds. A
proportion of these differences result from suggestive and/or direct
questioning. Such questioning was at times associated with the use of dolls
or body parts diagrams, which may themselves have a suggestive function under
some circumstances. There
is evidence that Lara was willing to speculate, giving answers to questions
to which she could not know the answer. The situation here may be that
children may feel that, because an adult is asking a question, they have to
provided some sort of answer in order to satisfy the adult. The result is
speculation. One can only tell a child is speculating when this is obvious,
but there may be many occasions on which this is occurring undetected. When
challenged from time to time, Lara responded by amending her statements, at
times reversing just previously stated reports. This raises problematic
issues, because it evidences a willingness to change reports to fit the logic
of the challenge, leaving the question as to just what are the facts. Lara
demonstrates a developmentally unusual level of anatomical knowledge in
respect of genital and anal areas. This suggests a level of education in
these matters. Lara also indicates education at home and at creche in respect
of 'secret touching'. The impact of this education on Lara's allegations is
not known, but has to be considered as a possible source of contamination. There
also are potential sources of external contamination from parental
questioning and / or discussion, from contacts with other former creche
children whom Lara identified as attending her school, and from the process
of counselling (if indeed Hildegard is a counsellor). The
emotional and behavioural patterns through the questioning provided little
indication of any distress or difficulty in articulating reports of the
alleged events, although it is noted that Lara very occasionally whispers
when talking about some matters. 8.0 Overall Conclusions: Lara
made a number of serious allegations in the course of these three interviews.
In the context of the formal interviews (that is not considering any
potential contamination from external sources of influence). Lara volunteered
allegations of penile-oral contact. It is notable that additional detail of
these, and revelation of other allegations, emerged in the process of
questioning which often involved suggestive, direct, and / or leading
questions to produce critical detail. This interviewing approach appears, to
a significant degree, to have contributed to the considerable inconsistency
in Lara's various reports of alleged events, both within interviews and
between interviews. Other factors affecting consistency may include problems
i n memory for what had already been said from interview to interview or
within interviews, and external contamination of memory (e.g., possibly
through counselling or parental discussion), and the relating of alleged
events which, if they had occurred, did so more than two to two and a half
years previously. It is worthy of note that the inconsistencies essentially
become evident only through tracking the content of the allegations across
the whole series of interviews. There
are many instances in which the interviewer failed to examine aspects of the
allegations in any depth, so that important contextual and behavioural issues
remain unexplored. Further, the occasional allegation of physical abuse,
primarily hitting and kicking, was essentially ignored, despite the fact that
one might expect these types of act to add considerably to the trauma and
aversiveness of the alleged sexual abuse. There
are indications that there were a number of potential sources of external
contamination, including parental questioning and/or discussion of
allegations, including assistance in remembering creche staff and identifying
location of an alleged event, discussion of some events with a person who may
be a counsellor, and contacts with former creche children. These need to be
considered because their impact may be on the content and nature of
allegations made, influence on memories, and on what is recalled through
suggestion and / or rehearsal. Emotional
reactivity and demeanour throughout is relatively stable, with no reliably
evident indices of emotional distress in relating what can be viewed as
likely to have been traumatic if experienced by a young child. In
sum, it is the writer's opinion that the problematic aspects of this series
of interviews raises serious questions about the reliability of the
allegations made by Lara Palm |
