|
The |
|
|
All names amended to match the
pseudonyms used in A City Possessed Part 6 Zelda Cypress (DoB May 81) Age at first interview 8yrs 11mo 1.0 Summary 1.1 Interviewer Use
of suggestive questions and some social influence Zelda
reticent, so direct questioning used often Potentially
suggestive use of body diagram Three
interviews 1.2 Possible
sources of external contamination: Mother's
questioning/discussion of allegations Rewards
(ring, toy seal) may be associated with disclosure 1.3 Child's
demeanour Shy, reticent,
anxious Quiet
spoken, whispers at times 2.0 Interview 92/172
07.04.92 2.1 Peter
Ellis as friend: 2.1.1
Zelda indicated (Transcript p7) that
Peter had been on the creche staff when she attended, that he had been her favourite teacher (p8) and that he had given her a silver
bracelet for her fourth or fifth birthday. Peter had talked to her a lot
(p9), had played good games, and did things she had liked. 2.1.2
Asked (p9) if he did anything she
didn't like, she said, "Not much". Prompted to say what she hadn't
liked, Zelda said that he had said things like 'I'll put you in a cage when
you grow up and we'll run off." (Note:
Could this sort of comment be the origin association of Ellis with cages by
Bart Dogwood?). This had made her feel 'yucky'. (Later, (p16) Zelda said she
believed he was serious when he said this, and that it was said 'heaps' and
(p18) that what scared her was his saying he would run away with her.). 2.1.3
Asked (p10) whether there were any
other things he said or did that Zelda felt not good about, Zelda said,
"Just things he said." 2.1.4
Zelda checked (p10) with the
interviewer over whether she would ever see Peter again, the interviewer
reassured her and told her (p11) about her role as an interviewer (Note: Much of the emphasis was on
children disclosing events that generated negative affect). The interviewer
suggested (p11) that Zelda may be scared she was going to see Peter again,
Zelda agreed. 2.1.5
Zelda said (p12) that Peter had
called her Zelda Welda, which she did not like (Note: Molly Sumach, had reported
similarly). 2.1.6
In response to a suggestive question
(p12), Zelda indicated she had had OK cuddles with Peter. 2.1.7
Zelda told (p13) that Peter had
visited her house, the interviewer said it was for
Zelda's birthday. Zelda said she once had gone to Peter's house. Direct
questioning (p13) revealed she had been left in his care by her mother. Comment: Zelda described what appears to have been a close
relationship with Peter Ellis, including a being given a birthday gift and a
suggestion of display of affection ('cuddles'). He apparently attended her
birthday and she had been left in his care on one occasion. These may be
perfectly innocent acts, but it has to be acknowledged that the circumstances
at least create the potential for seduction and, possibly, abuse. 2.2 Allegation
of indecent assault: 2.2.1
Zelda (p15) asked how long the talk
was to be. The interviewer suggests to her that she was nervous and scared
before and asked directly if she still is. Zelda whispered, "Peter.". The interviewer asked directly if she was scared
of Peter, Zelda nodded. Asked (p16) how much, Zelda said very. Asked when
this started, Zelda said, "When 'X' [mother] reminded me about him.". Asked if she was scared before the reminder she
said, "No.". Comment: Important here is the context and process of
reminding If Zelda was told Ellis had sexually abused children and quizzed as
to whether she had been a victim, this could create problems of suggestion or
contamination. A parent who learned of the allegations against Ellis and
knowing her child had had a close relationship with him and that she had left
the child in his care might feel additional concern, and thus felt obliged to
question her daughter. Further, if, for example, the child had engaged in
normal sexual exploratory play with peers, under questioning the description
of what happened could easily be attached to Ellis' name and an allegation
generated. 2.2.2
Zelda revealed (p19) that among the
'bad things' Ellis had talked about was his 'diddle.' She said (p20) she
could not remember what he had said, so was asked to think really hard about
what he had said (Note:
Application of pressure to remember may generate false reports as the child
tries to please the adult). 2.2.3
A body diagram was drawn by the
interviewer (pp20-21) and Zelda was asked to name the parts (Note: Rawls (1996) found this use of
body diagrams to be suggestive, prompting false allegations of sexual abuse
by younger children). Zelda was asked to identify (p21) eyes, nose, mouth,
fingers, toes, thigh, funny bone, neck, tummy button [knows (p22) function of
umbilicus], breasts, vagina. Asked about boys, she indicated no breasts and
identified (p23) 'diddle' 2.2.4
Asked (p23) the source of her knowledge, she said books, identifying this as where she
had seen boy's bodies with no clothes on. Asked directly if she had seen
boys' diddles, she shook her head, asked if she had seen anybody's diddle,
she shook her head. Asked, "Only in books?",
she nodded (p23). 2.2.5 Social
influence was now applied to Zelda by the interviewer to get her to repeat an
allegation made to her mother (p23), she was asked if able to remember what
she had told her mother. She shook her head. The interviewer appeared (p24)
to increase the pressure by going over the list of bad' things Zelda had thus
far alleged Peter doing and was asked if there was anything she could
remember to add to the list. Zelda responded by saying "He talked about
my vagina.". Asked what had been said, she
replied, "Nothing much.". Asked if it was
hard to say, Zelda nodded and asked why the interviewer wanted to know. The
interviewer said that she thought Zelda was really scared, that she had kept
them to herself for a long time, and when Zelda said they were 'yuck' and
that she kept them in her head, the interviewer encouraged her to divulge and
feel better. Asked (p25) if there was more to tell, Zelda indicated that a
lot of things she didn't like had been talked about. 2.2.6
Some time was devoted to reassuring
Zelda (pp26-27) and the interviewer sought to add to the 'list'. Zelda said
(p27) he had talked about getting into his bed with no clothes on. At this
stage Zelda sought reassurance that no one else would find out about what she
was saying. The interviewer said, "You haven't told mum any of this,
have you?", Zelda indicated she had not. Then
the interviewer told her that she had told her mother but did not now
remember, Zelda then claimed to remember. Asked (pp29-29) what she did
remember, Zelda said (p28), "He wanted, he wanted me touch, he showed me
his diddle.". (Note: Earlier (p23) Zelda had said she had only ever seen one in
a book). 2.2.7
Zelda went on to say (pp28-29) in
response to mainly direct or multiple choice questions, that she thought this
had happened at his house when he was looking after her, in his bedroom, that
she had been seated on his bed and he had been standing 'far away' near the
door, neither had said anything and that afterwards he had pulled his pants
back up and she went home. She did not know who took her home. 2.2.8
Zelda asked (p30) if the interviewer
would tell anyone and got reassurance that it would only be people helping
her, not Peter Ellis. Asked what she thought might happen if Ellis knew, Zelda said she did not know. 2.2.9
Asked suggestively (p30), "Was
it a secret or something?", Zelda said he had
said it was a secret and a game when (p31) he had pulled down his pants and
that she was allowed to play it. She said he had said 'that it was his
special game' and she was not to tell anyone. The interviewer restated (p31)
the allegation thus far, and asked (p31) about whether Zelda went to bed with
Peter with no clothes on. Zelda (p33) shook her head. In response to direct
questioning she indicated she had never seen him in bed without clothes and
that he had talked about it at creche. 2.2.10
In response to further questioning
Zelda indicated she felt safe talking about things to her mother rather than
her father. The interviewer suggested she return to talk more so that she
would not have to worry about it any more. 3.0 Conclusions: Zelda
presented as shy and reticent, the interviewer had to encourage her to talk,
as Zelda indicated she was scared Ellis might find out about her allegations,
although she had no evident threat in mind. Perhaps as a result of her
apparent reluctance, the interviewer tended to use a number of suggestive
and/or direct questions and occasional suggestive social influence
4.1.4
The interviewer reminded Zelda
(pp5-6) of what she had said about going to Peter's house [adding detail that
Zelda had not herself provided about the timing of the visit]. The
interviewer asked Zelda to talk more about that. She repeated that she was
sitting on his bed and that he was close to the door, he took down his pants
and she could not recall him saying anything and it happened once. (Note: These details match those in
92/172 and were not part of the reminder at the start of this interview). 4.1.5
The interviewer prompted (p7) Zelda
to talk about going to bed with no clothes on. Zelda said Peter had said it
in a 'different', 'yucky' way, "He talked about sex."; "Doing
sex.". Peter had told her about this. Asked
(p8) what he had told, she said he had explained about a man and a woman. The
interviewer produced the body diagram and asked if there was any other part
of Peter's body she saw, but she implied just the 'diddle'. 4.1.6
Asked (p7) what she did, she said
she went away and ignored him by going and looking out the widow. (Note: In interview 92/172 Zelda said
(p29) she could only remember him showing his penis and that she went home
afterwards). 4.1.7
Asked what else happened while he
was standing showing his diddle, Zelda said (pp8-9) he had told her that it
was something that we have a baby with. 4.1.8
Social influence was applied (p9) by
the interviewer to get Zelda to make a further disclosure. Zelda said it was
something about Peter and was asked to write it for the interviewer. After
some discussion about other matters (pp10- 12) the interviewer (p12) listed
some of the negative feeling terms used by Zelda about Peter and asked direct
questions about sadness and anger (Note:
Terms not used by Zelda, but she circled anger after the suggestion). 4.1.9
The interviewer then applied social
influence (p12) to get Zelda to talk about a subject that she had talked to
her mother about. Zelda asked what and the interviewer asked suggestively if
it was something Peter said or did. Zelda said, "Did". The
interviewer asked (p13) if it was to her or someone else, Zelda said,
"Me.". Asked where did it happen, Zelda
seemed unsure of the context, so the interviewer said, "Hitting
you." (Note: Zelda had not
raised this.). She asked the interviewer, "How do you mean?". 4.1.10
Asked (p13) to write it down, Zelda
apparently indicated that Peter touched her vagina with his hand. She said
(p13) it was in the bedroom and in response to a multiple-choice question and
a direct question (p14) indicated she was standing on the bed. Direct
questions were asked replies indicated that Peter had his clothes on, he pulled down her pants and touched her with his
fingers. Feelings of 'bad' and 'yucky' were described. She said (p14-15)
Peter said that it was a secret game and not to tell anyone. She had told her
mother a long time after, when her mother had asked her about Peter, she
indicated it was yesterday (p15). The touching had happened once at the same
time as the earlier alleged event. Asked why she had not disclosed earlier in
the interview, Zelda said she didn't want to tell anyone. 4.1.11
Toys were produced (p16) and Zelda
said that they had started in the lounge playing snakes and ladders and Peter
had invited her to play a game in the bedroom. It began with showing his
'diddle'. After he had touched her vagina she pulled up her pants (p17).
Suggestive questions now were asked about what feelings she had, she was
asked if it had hurt or not, she chose 'hurt'. Crosses were added to the body
diagram (p17) to locate touching. Asked if any other parts needed a cross (Note: This can prove suggestive),
Zelda said 'breast'. She said his hand had touched her breast in a circular
motion. 4.1.12
Asked (p18) if Peter had asked her if
he could touch her vagina, she nodded and said she had said no, but he had
done it. 4.1.13
Zelda is noticed (p19) wearing a
signet ring (not noticed before by interviewer) given her by her mother (Note: Is this a reward for
disclosure?). 4.1.14
Left in the room (p20) Zelda sorted
through the toy box and said, "I Hate Peter." to herself. 4.1.15
The interview resumed and Zelda was
asked (p20) what Peter's penis looked like, she referred to the drawing and
appeared to describe testes as well. She said (p21) it looked funny. Asked
where his hand was she pointed to the drawing, the interviewer interpreted
this as being on his penis. Asked directly if the touch on her vagina was
around or inside, she said around and demonstrated a squeezing motion (Note: Could this be squeezing the
labia together?). Asked (p21) if any other part of Peter had touched her or
just his hand, Zelda said (p22) only his hand. Asked about other parts hurt,
Zelda indicated only her breast. 4.1.16
Zelda elaborated on why she had not
told, claiming Peter had told her that 'X' [mother] would not love her if she
told. 4.1.17
The interviewer led Zelda to tell if
she ever had been touched on her bottom. She said only once (p22) at the same
place (p23) and his hand had gone around and around. (Note: Suggestive use of diagram elicited allegation). 4.1.18
Zelda indicated (p23) in response to a
direct question that she had told everything about the touching and talking
with Peter. 5.0 Conclusions: The
interviewer used suggestive and direct questioning and some social influence
in obtaining allegations about alleged abuse of Zelda. These techniques are
problematic because of their potential effect on the accuracy of resultant
reports, in that while more information may be obtained, its accuracy may be
much less than with open questions and / or free recall. It also is possible
that the use of the body parts diagram had the potential to generate further
allegations, because it can serve either as a reminder or as a prompt leading
to embellished reports. The
interviewer also put considerable time at the start of the interview into
reminding Zelda of what she had alleged in the previous interview. This could
function as a review which consolidates memory and increases the chances of a
consistent report. In effect, the opportunity to test for consistency is lost
by use of this strategy, However, it is noted that Zelda was consistent on a
number of details that had not been included in the review. It is not
possible to tell whether this is because she was telling of actual events or
because the detail had been rehearsed and consolidated in other tellings, e.g., to her mother. From
what Zelda said, she had been questioned further by her mother after the
initial interview. The possibility exists that, if this were by suggestive
question and/ or involved some pressure, Zelda might well have felt obliged
to disclose more, resulting in this second interview. Alternatively, it may
have helped her to remember more, hence the need to return. In
this interview, under' the above questioning regime, Zelda expanded on her
initial allegation and added more detail. A number of factors could account
for this, these include: First, it is possible Zelda has remembered more
since the first interview; second, Zelda may have become less anxious about
revealing her abuse and more trusting of the interviewer; third, Zelda may
have felt she had to tell more to her mother in response to the latter's
enquiries after the first interview and she knew the interviewer was aware of
what she said to her mother, so felt obliged to repeat it (whether true or
not); fourth, Zelda was rewarded with a new ring after the first interview
and this might increase the probability of further reports and, possibly,
further rewards. This could either increase the desire to disclose more of
what had happened or increase the desire to disclose more, regardless of
whether it happened or not. Some
of what Zelda described between herself and Ellis sounded like sex education.
This might have come from the sort of exchange she alleged had occurred.
Other possible sources include reading books (she refers to getting
information from books) and school and/or parental instruction. Zelda
presented as quiet, reserved, and reluctant to talk, much as in the first
interview. What she described, admittedly under a fairly suggestive
questioning process, was essentially credible. Whether the perpetrator, if
there had been one, was Peter Ellis cannot definitely be ascertained from
this. 6.0 Interview 92/ 302
28.05.92 6.1 Context
of the third interview: 6.1.1
Zelda presented as more relaxed,
cheerful and outgoing at the start of this interview. She still spoke quietly
and whispered occasionally. 6.1.2
The new allegations, resulting in
this interview, apparently arose after a medical examination of Zelda
(presumably as a result of her having made allegations of sexual abuse) and
it seems were made to her mother (Transcript p4, p9) some two weeks after the
examination (p9). 6.1.3
Zelda asked (p4) the interviewer to
ask her questions when asked to report her new allegations (Note: This creates the environment in
which direct or suggestive questioning becomes more probable). 6.2 Allegation
of indecent touching at creche: 6.2.1
Zelda said (pp4-5) the events
happened at the creche when she was aged four years, but she could not recall
where in the creche (Note: This
memory is now some five years old). The alleged behaviour happened to her and
there were no witnesses, nor did she tell at the time. She alleged (p5)
[whispered] that Peter touched her bottom with his hand. 6.2.2
Asked (p6) to describe the touch,
Zelda demonstrated rubbing. The body diagram was produced and Zelda was asked
to define the function of the anus. She also had pointed out to her the tummy
button (p6) and breasts (pp6-7), and was asked to identify the genitals, she
named vagina and, for boys, dick/diddle. The function of the 'vagina' and
anus were sought and given (p7). 6.2.3
Zelda (p7) made two marks on the
behind of the figure in the diagram. 6.2.4
She was asked (p8) multiple choice
questions about whether touching was on top or under clothing and whether she
had clothes on or off, she chose underneath and on. A further multiple choice
question about where she felt his hand was answered with the choice of "On
my skin". Comment: The above process could be seen as setting up
possible allegations because it ranged over aspects of the body parts that
were not related to the disclosure by the child, which referred to her bottom
only. When asked direct open questions of some detail, Zelda had tended to
say she could not remember, as a result detail was obtained primarily by
suggestive questioning, which raises the question about what she remembers
and what is simply response to options proffered by
the interviewer. 6.2.4
Further direct questioning (p9)
focused on the medical examination of genitals and anus and the resulting
further disclosure to her mother. (Note:
The medical examination may have stimulated recall of actual events or
provided a basis for generating new allegations). 6.2.5
Zelda talks (pp9-11) about getting a
new fluffy seal toy that she had always wanted. This revelation seems to have
been stimulated by a comment from the interviewer about Zelda's mother being
shopping. Zelda appears to include the interviewer in the suggestion of
getting a new toy. (Note: This
again raises the issue of rewards for making disclosures which could also
motivate the making of false allegations). 6.2.6
Zelda is asked (ph) to tell about
what she has reported to her mother. She repeats her inability (p5) to
remember where in the creche this happened. Asked why she did not tell, Zelda
said, "Because he, he did it, he said if I did then he will come to my
house and tell me off.". (Note: On p5 Zelda said she could not remember Peter saying
anything.). Comment: This threat seems a most unlikely one. 6.2.7
Zelda then added (p11) to her
allegation to one which included being made to touch 'his' [presumably Ellis'J penis. He pulled down his pants and she had to
touch with her fingers (p11), demonstrated (p12) with a squeezing movement of
the fingers, which she called 'tickling'. At this point the interviewer
suggested that this was similar to that described as having been done at his
house that Zelda had told about last time (92 / 183). Zelda nodded. (Note: Zelda had made no such
allegation of having to touch his penis at that time. Her nodding suggests
acquiescence with the suggestion). 6.2.8
Asked (p12) what his diddle felt
like, Zelda wrapped her hand in her jumper and described it as "Hardy
softy". 6.2.9
Zelda said (p12) Peter went into the
girls' toilets a lot, she could not remember if he helped kids on the toilet,
she did not receive help, but he came in and waited. She then seemed to
change her statement (p13) in the face of a suggestive question to indicate
that Peter had helped her, but that no other teachers did. She said it was
yucky and she used to tell him not to, but he kept on. Her own childhood
memory was that no one had helped her, even at home, when she was three or
four (Note Possible, but unlikely,
especially after defecation). 6.2.10
Zelda was asked (p14) to explain what
was yucky, and she said it used to hurt, indicating the genital area on the
diagram and in answer to a direct question also identified her 'back bottom'.
(Note: Children may complain of
hurting because the wiping adult is not always aware of the pressure being
applied, and the toilet paper is not always soft in these settings). 6.2.11
Asked (p15) how many times this happened,
Zelda said about 10 (Note: Such
estimations may be meaningless in terms of accuracy but can give the
impression of detail remembered). Asked 'did it hurt lots or not much', Zelda
chose 'lots'. Asked was paper used, she nodded. 6.2.12
Asked (p15) if anything else happened
in the toilets, there was some confusion about the answer [transcribed first
as "he weed on mei, which transpired to be an
allegation that she was touched after she went to (p16) the toilet. Zelda
pointed to the genital and anal areas of the diagram, and said it had been
with hands and fingers. Asked if this was different from the toilet paper,
she said yes, asked which came first, she said toilet paper, the interviewer
interpreted this as toilet paper then fingers. No one else was present.
Asking (p16) if it hurt as when paper was used, Zelda said worse. 6.2.13
Asked (p17) to demonstrate touching
Zelda made a squeezing motion [similar to that in 92/183]. 6.2.14
Asked (p17) about other touching Zelda
pointed to the diagram and said "Boobies". Asked on top of or under
clothing she said both. Asked (p18) if at creche or elsewhere, she said
creche. Asked if at the same or different times, she first said she could not
remember and then said at different times and as many times as the other
touching happened. The interviewer used the number 10. Asked how this felt,
she said yucky and on her bottom 'horrible'. Asked (p19) if they, felt sore,
she said yes. Asked if it went on for a long time in the toilet, was it quick
or a long time, Zelda chose a long time. She said Peter only said "There
you go." (Note: This would
seem consistent with someone having wiped a child clean after toiletting and then dismissing them to return to former
activity). Comment: One problem with these allegations is the way the
body parts diagram was used in a way that could prompt further allegations by
having the child identify body parts about which no allegation had, to that
point been made. The subsequent allegations could be said to be prompted in
this way. Further, the use of suggestive and/or direct questioning to elicit
detail also could have a suggestive or prompting effect. The additive effect
of these two processes may have contributed to Rawls (1996) finding with
younger children, even when the closed questions were apparently less
suggestive than these (J. M. Rawls, 1998, personal communication). 6.3 Allegation
of attempted penile-vulval /penile-anal contact: 6.3.1
Zelda began (p20) by suggesting that
she had something more to tell that had not been told to her mother. In
response to a multiple choice question re location, she selected 'creche' but
could not remember where. The interviewer then suggested (p21) that as Zelda
had said the earlier events had happened in the toilets and asked which of
the two children's or the adult toilet was involved. Zelda chose 'grown ups'
(Note: Earlier (p12) she had said
the girl's toilets, implying children's). 6.3.2
The touching she had or had not told
to her mother was traversed in a series of direct questions (p21). Zelda said
her next allegation was too yucky to tell so was invited to write it down.
She asked the interviewer to leave, which she did (p22). Zelda consulted
notes or drawings on the table and with face close to paper, writes and/or colours in. When the interviewer returned she was allowed
to look but not read aloud. She said things like, "Ok, its pretty scary,
eh..."; "...It seems to me this is the really tough bit, eh.";
"...cos you're scared of what people are going
to say, is that part of it?". Asked what they might say, Zelda said,
"That I was silly.". The interviewer
suggested it might have been embarrassing Zelda agreed. The interviewer (p23)
wanted to add it to the list, Zelda declined. 6.3.3
Two body parts diagrams, one male,
the other female, were introduced (p23), one identified as Zelda, the other
as Peter. Zelda said (pp23-24) they were both stood up with no clothes on in
the toilet, she had just her pants off (p24), removed by Peter down to her
ankles (p25). He said it was a game and he wanted to put 'them' together, but
she did not let him (p24). They were standing facing each other (p25), his pants were on a stool and his underpants off. She want to participate and did not let any part of his body
touch hers. She alleged this happened about five times. (Note: The problem with this description is the relative body
heights of a four year old and an adult, her face would be nearer his
genitals than her vulva would be). 6.3.4
Asked (p26) to describe proximity,
her demonstration was not clear to the writer. She said just his hands
touched her and demonstrated by crossing her hands over her chest. 6.3.5
Asked (p26) if it was always in the
toilet, Zelda now added a new allegation that it occurred once at his house (Note: In interview 92/183, p23, she had
said she had told the interviewer everything about the touching and
talking.). She said she had seen his diddle and (p27) that he had wanted his
diddle to touch her as part of the game and was telling her to do it by
saying she could go closer and the diddle and vagina would be able to go
together. Asked directly if this ever occurred, she indicated no, but agreed
they got close. 6.3.6
Asked (p27) if the diddle and the
vagina ever touched, Zelda changed her statement to 'only a bit' and
demonstrated [amount not clear to viewer" In response to further
questioning (p28) she said it touched only a bit, and she had stopped it.
Asked directly again later (p28) she indicated it had touched a tiny bit on
the outside of her vagina and that she didn't feel it go on the inside. Asked
if the diddle touched any other part of her she said not. A suggestive
question asked what about round the back In response Zelda negated her
immediately previous statement and said "yes". Asked (p28) if it
felt hard or soft, she again (as on p12) wrapped her hand in her jumper and
said 'hardy softy' and in response to direct questions indicated it was on
the outside of her anus and did not go in. 6.3.7
Further questioning (p29) indicated
this alleged event occurred once at his house on her only visit [the same
visit as the other alleged events in previous interviews]. Asked again how
many times in the toilet, Zelda said four (Note said about five (p25)). Feelings Zelda might have were suggested (p30), she chose angry. It was suggested
that she might work these through with Hildegard [counsellor?"
Asked (p31) whether she had touched the penis more than five or ten times,
Zelda volunteered 'about 15' (Note:
She said about 10 times (p15)). Comment: The interviewer obtained no information on
context in respect of these allegations, particularly about body positions.
Zelda had said both were standing in relation to the toilet allegation, but
this has to be open to challenge given relative body heights which would make
contact of the types alleged extremely improbable. No information was sought
or given in respect of the allegation of events at Ellis' house. 6.3.8
Asked (p31) about the penis touching
the vagina, Zelda said, "A bit." then retracted this by saying
"It didn't quite reach, it just went like that [not discernible] and I
didn't let it happen like that.". The interviewer then said, Right, Ok,
so there was no other part of you that had to touch his diddle. No. So your
hands had to touch.", to which Zelda replied,
"Only my hands.". The interviewer then said (p31), "And nearly
your vagina. Any other part?", Zelda replied,
"No.". Comment: Zelda appears to be changing what she alleged in
significant ways. First she says now that the penis did not touch her vagina,
stating now that it did not quite reach. In fact if she and Ellis were
standing it would not be likely to reach at all. She also now has not
repeated her allegation about the penis touching her bottom, saying no when
asked if it touched any other part. These changes are important in the
context of making allegations of attempted sexual violation. 6.3.9
Asked (p31) if his 'diddle' did
anything Zelda asked, "How do you mean?",
asked if it stayed the same or was different, she said it stayed the same.
The interviewer led that it stayed 'hardy softy', Zelda indicated 'yes'. Comment: This question is rather meaningless in the
absence of context. Saying it stayed the same does not provide any
information on what it was the same as. The child originally had used the
term 'hardy softy', having wrapped her hand in her jumper, but no effort was
made to determine then whether there was an erection or not, One might be
assumed from the term hardy softy, but it cannot be concluded with any
certainty that this was the case. 7.0 Conclusions: This
interview used direct and suggestive multiple choice questions, in
conjunction with potentially suggestive use of body parts diagrams, to elicit
a number of the allegations and much of the detail. Some information was
volunteered, but could have been contaminated by the way the body parts
diagram had been employed, since additional allegations involving other body
areas (e,g. breasts, vagina, penis) followed after
these had been identified on the diagram, even though not included in the
initial allegation that led to its introduction. Equally,
important contextual information was overlooked in the questioning so that
the circumstances in which the alleged events occurred often were at best
sketchy. For example, the body positions suggested for alleged penile-vaginal
and anal contact were unrealistic as described for the toilet and no
information on these was sought or given for the alleged occasion at Ellis'
home. Also, the description of the penis as 'hardy softy' was somewhat
unsatisfactory, since it gave the impression of at least partial erection
without ever clearly indicating just what the status of the penis was, yet no
clarification or elucidation was sought. Zelda
revealed herself to be somewhat suggestible, often relying on question
content to give detail and producing inconsistent testimony in the presence
of suggestive questions (e.g., changing from the girls' toilet to the adult,
changing her statement about penile contact with vagina and anus from contact
to no contact). Zelda's
description of touching of vagina and anus in the toilets seemed, from what
she alleged Ellis to have said, 'there you go', to suggest that wiping was
what had occurred and the child was then dismissed with those words. The
question is could she discriminate the paper from the hand (given the
thinness of the paper) and is it possible that memory of the simple act of
wiping now became an allegation of abuse in the context of the questioning
about Ellis? It is
of concern that Zelda appeared to be getting rewards, in the form of a toy
seal on this occasion, from -her mother for making allegations. This creates
the possibility that a child might be tempted to embellish or create
allegations in order to maintain rewards, given that an effect of rewards is
to increase the behaviour that earns them. Another consequence of rewarding
is that, upon cessation, the behaviour that originally earned them may become
more frequent, more variable, or more intense. What this means is that more,
and possibly more varied and extreme, allegations are likely to follow
cessation. This could be an explanation for the production of new and
different allegations over time by Zelda and other children in this series of
interviews. Other
possible sources of contamination include maternal questioning and
counselling, both of which could provide for rehearsal and/or elaboration of
allegations. Zelda's
emotional behaviour was slightly more positive in this interview, especially
at the start. She still came across as shy and reticent, but it is not
possible to tell how this differs from Zelda in other settings, or whether
her reticence is at all due to•anxiety, to the
alleged abuse, or to experience of sex as a taboo subject, hence the
embarrassment, the whispering, and the writing things down in preference to
saying them. The
impression the write gained from this interview was that the allegations were
of a somewhat different character to those initially made and thus were
somewhat less convincing, perhaps because of inconsistency and / or changes
in testimony. 8.0 Overall conclusions: Most
of the allegations made by Zelda emerged from direct and/or suggestive
questioning. This may have occurred because of her demonstrable reticence, in
all three interviews and because she asked the interviewer to question her in
one (92/302). There was use of social influence to get her to report and body
parts diagrams were used in two (92/172; 92/ 302) to elicit body part names
in ways that could have prompted further allegations. Also, the interviewer
kept a list of Zelda's allegations and cited these back to her at length at
intervals, which provided both possible reminders and prompts which may have
had a contaminating effect. An unintended effect of these strategies could
have been to encourage and shape additional allegations. Zelda
showed herself to be somewhat suggestible, changing her responses in line
with suggestions and sometimes elaborating detail in response to such
questions when she had just previously indicated that she could not remember. Sources
of information about sexual matters include: Possibly the events she alleged,
possibly books she had read, and possibly peer/school/parental information.
Some of the events Zelda described, particularly in her first two interviews
raised the question of seduction and abuse, including gifts, opportunity, and
described acts. This does not mean that Peter Ellis necessarily was the
perpetrator if they did occur, she could have been
describing normal child exploration or exploitation by another adult. It has
to be acknowledged that the allegations were-made in a climate of parental
concern and questioning that focused on Peter Ellis. 'Attribution to Ellis
would have been easy under such circumstances. The description of events in
the third interview (92/302) was somewhat less convincing primarily because
of the problem of any contact being possible with both standing and the
apparent retraction of the allegations of penile-vulval
and penile-anal contact. Zelda
is recounting events alleged to have occurred some four to five years
previously, so loss of detail is to be expected. Her memory, except under
suggestive questioning is similar to what one might expect given her
immaturity at the time of creche attendance and the intervening passage of
time in that she has limited recollection of what happened outside of what
could be seen as basic facts. Equally, she might be capable of making up a
basic story but be too unimaginative to embellish it without suggestive
prompting Her
emotional responses raise the question of her being abused, given her
expressed anxiety, her reticence, feeling of embarrassment, her voice changes
at times, and her gradual disclosure. Alternative explanations include her
being normally reticent and shy, reluctant to talk about sexual matters and,
as a result of suggestive parental questioning has made allegations, and is
now anxious that Ellis might learn that she is making allegations up, having
previously been a good friend. It is not possible to tell which, if either,
of these alternatives is the case. Potential
sources of external contamination include parental inquiries, counselling and
written material on sexual matters. There is also the question of rewards, as
she mentioned in 92/183 and 92/302 that her mother had, respectively, given
her a ring and a toy seal. If these gifts were contingent on making
allegations, they could function as rewards, increasing the likelihood of
further disclosure. As noted in 7.0 above, cessation of rewards also has
effects on changing the pattern of behaviour as the rewarded individual works
to reestablish the reward regime by increasing the rate, variability, or
intensity of responding. |
