|
|
The |
|||
|
Last
…… 2008 Index …… Next |
||||
|
This page last
updated June 25 2008 Peter Ellis observed that his case had compelling evidence that
should be considered: that the Eichelbaum report has been debunked by Ross
Francis in the Law Journal report, and secondly the new study done by
Professor Harlene Hayne. Peter Ellis also referred to the decision in the Privy
Council in the David Bain case where there was a decision that the judge
should not be interfering with the evidence that goes before a jury. That
decision has direct relevance to the Ellis case. 2008-0623
- Christchurch ZB - Transcript of interview with Helen Clark and Peter Ellis. recent
.
A later Southland Times editorial that
reviews the legislative changes says that Peter Ellis question, asking whether
the legislation applies to tainted convictions as well as tainted acquittals,
is a fair question. 2008-0611 -
The Press - Two equal sides? recent . 2008-0611 -
Radio NZ - Proposed bill on retrials must be fair for all - Ellis recent .
2008-0623
- Southland Times - A few legal rethinks
New
.
Barrister Gary Gotlieb says there should be no
requirement, regarding parole decisions, to acknowledge guilt. There are many
cases where people later confess, but there are instances, too, where a
prisoner's denial is genuine. He referred to the cases of David Dougherty and
Rex Haig. And noted that Peter Ellis did not want parole if
it involved confessing to what he maintains he did not do. In the case of Bob Schollum, parole was refused because he
was considered an undue risk not only because of his denial of guilt, but for
other reasons such as his lack of remorse and his lack of empathy for the
victim. But a lack of remorse and lack
of empathy for the victim are both consistent with a denial of guilt. 2008-0607 -
NZ Herald - Parole: when confessions don't count New .
One notable member is Val Sim ..... “She is experienced
in criminal law matters, having previously been a chief legal counsel for the
Ministry of Justice. In this role, she helped build public confidence in the
criminal justice system by standing firm in her opinion (to the minister of
justice) that the widely mistrusted conviction of Peter Ellis on child
molestation charges should not be reviewed by an inquiry, nor a pardon
granted” 2008-0424
- National Business Review - A committee possessed recent
.
In a further comment by Brian, it is revealed
that a formal allegation of perjury has been made against Karen Zelas, but
the police will not consider the complaint. The reasons for not considering
the complaint are provided and critiqued by Brian, who suggests that “it is time that the police came out of
“justification” mode, justifying and trying to protect themselves from their
previous shoddy involvement in this case “ 2008-0408 -
Poneke Weblog - Ablett Kerr gives detailed reasons why a royal commission is
needed
·
Crucial interview tapes that would have assisted any assessment of
reliability were not played to them; ·
The defence were restricted in their ability to both lead evidence and
cross-examine in a way that would have assisted any assessment of
reliability; ·
Evidence outside the scope of [the Evidence Act] was given by the
prosecution expert [Karen Zelas]; ·
The evidence given by the defence expert [Keith Le Page] was unfairly
ridiculed; ·
The prosecution expert failed to support her evidence by reference, in
the standard way, to literature and statistical information and consequently
the jury were deprived of hearing what relevant mainstream research into the
reliability of the evidence of children said. This research, of course,
supported the defence contention that the children’s evidence had been
contaminated and could not be relied upon; ·
The jury were denied the opportunity to compare the evidence in the
case with the known dangers of contamination associated with the style of
questioning by both parents and professionals; ·
The jury never heard of the concerns that the prosecution expert had
held pre-trial as to the contamination of a particular child; ·
The jury was unaware that the lead complainant would later admit that
she had lied about Ellis indecently touching her; ·
The jury could not have understood how great was the inequality of
arms between the prosecution and defence and the effect that such inequality
had on the proceedings. Poneke describes further why the case is a travesty of
justice, and how the Justice officials are still fighting to prevent justice
from being done. 2008-0408 -
Poneke Weblog - Ablett Kerr gives detailed reasons why a royal commission is
needed
E Williams, in another letter says that an inquiry into the Civic
Creche case is important, and that for the sake of all those involved,
including the children, the issue should be cleared up Phil Sinclair, a letter writer to the NZ Herald refers to promises made
by Labour MPs before winning election to government, and their subsequent
inaction, suggested to be due to a “small
and overly influential bloc of interest parties who had good connections to
other Labour MPs” 2008-0407 -
The Press - Peter Ellis let down again by poor justice system 2008-0405 - The
Press - Too hard basket? recent . 2008-0402 -
NZ Herald - Ellis case
Rex Widerstrom says that the issue is an important election issue: “if a would-be politician isn’t interested
in something as fundamental as the integrity of our “justice” system, and the
wrongful imprisonment of the innocent, what business do they have standing?” F.E Smith writes a thoughtful essay. Some quotations:: “we have a general societal attitude today
that puts ‘getting tough on crime’ ahead of the rights of the the
individual” “If we believed in due
process, then an inquiry would be a given simply because there is so much
concern about Peter Ellis’ convictions” “While screwing the justice system is
a vote winner, people like Peter Ellis will continue to suffer.” He also makes reference to the “outrageousness of appointing Val Sim a law
commissioner in light of her total misfeasance the first Ellis inquiry Tim Barclay is “more in favour of a Royal Commission in the criminal
justice system” than he is on the particular problems of one person Yvette lists “baggage at
stake” that may be unerlying reasons for not having an inquiry: financial
considerations; discredited methods of interviewing children; police conduct;
feminist agenda; media hysteria. Mark says “It’s time for a commission of inquiry to be held. The sooner the
better.” Other comments include “An obvious travesty
of justice in NZ” “Why is the
government so afraid of a search for the truth? “Peter Ellis’ only
“crime” was being a poof in a child-care centre during a disturbing time of
child abuse and witchcraft hysteria” “The Peter Ellis
case was NZs version of the Witches of Salem” 2008-0328 -
kiwiblog - Peter Ellis
She concluded however with a possible significant concern:
"At the end of the day, we have to
find enough money to get that petition over there," 2008-0328
- The Press - Royal inquiry into Ellis case rejected
2008-0328 - One
News - No Royal Commission for Ellis
Judith Ablett Kerr is further reported saying she was disappointed
the inquiry bid had been "brushed
aside in such a superficial way” She believed
articles in the New Zealand Law Journal and an Otago University study cast
both the convictions and a ministerial inquiry into doubt 2008-0328 - NZ
Herald - Govt 'no' to inquiry plea appals Ellis 2008-0328 - One
News - No Royal Commission for Ellis 2008-0328
- The Press - Royal inquiry into Ellis case rejected 2008-0328
- Newstalk ZB - Ellis believes inquiry decision inevitable 2008-0328 -
Radio NZ - Ellis loses bid for Royal Commission
Ellis
lawyer, Judith Ablett-Kerr says “frustrating” would be "a very
genteel way" to describe how she feels.
Keri Hulme Author Keri Hulme, writing in comments of
Poneke Weblog says
“Politicians....have neither the guts nor the intelligence nor the willpower
to urge judicial investigation” 2008-0327 -
Stuff - Rejection of inquiry call 'cavalier' - Hood 2008-0327 -
NZ Herald - Rejection of inquiry into Peter Ellis creche case 'cavalier' 2008-0327
- Newstalk ZB - Lawyer beyond frustrated in Peter Ellis case 2008-0326 -
Poneke Weblog - Peter Ellis told “go to the Privy Council”
2008-0327 -
NZ Herald - Ellis Royal Commission rejected 2008-0327 -
Newstalk ZB - No Royal Commission on Inquiry into Ellis case 2008-0327 - One
News - No Royal Commission for Ellis
The weblog observes that the letter from the Associate
Justice Minister “is straight from the
same Justice Ministry folk who have fought successfully for 15 years now to ensure
the Civic case is not reopened, despite almost everyone, including them,
knowing it is a complete crock and the biggest miscarriage of justice since
Thomas.” 2008-0326 -
Poneke Weblog - Peter Ellis told “go to the Privy Council” 1. Fallacy
that the Ellis case has received extensive scrutiny 2. Fallacy
that the Eichelbaum “experts” expressed the same overall conclusions 3 Fallacy
that Eichelbaum placed significant weight on opinion of Professor Davies 4 Fallacy
that Eichelbaum made independent inquiries in his selection of experts
5. Assertion
that Ms Ablett Kerr is seeking to appeal to Privy Council 6 Ross
Francis outlines highly questionable aspects of Ellis’ trial 7. Recent
research findings provide evidence that the conviction is unsafe Ross Francis says:
The flaws in Ellis’ trial, the failure of the appeals court to address
the expert opinion evidence, and the recent findings of Prof. Hayne raise
serious doubts about the safety of Peter Ellis’ convictions 2008-0319 -
Letter by Ross Francis to Associate Justice Minister Rick Barker 2008-0130 -
Poneke’s Weblog - Movement at last in the Peter Ellis case
David Farrar in Kiwiblog “totally endorses the call for a Royal Commission of
Inquiry into the Ellis case. One needs the latitude a full
commission of inquiry has, to deal with the public’s deep scepticism over
this case.” Farrar continues “It should be in the interest of all politicians
for there to be confidence in the justice system. The Ellis case
corrosively undermines that confidence. While convictions are not a
public popularity contest, I know of almost no-one who thinks the Ellis
convictions are safe. And this is based on a massive amount of
published research on the case” 2008-0130 -
Kiwiblog - Do the right thing on Ellis case
2008-0130 -
NZ Herald - Peter Ellis' lawyers seeking royal commission hearing 2008-0130 -
The Press - Govt mulls royal inquiry for Ellis 2008-0130
- Three News - Supporter: Peter Ellis inquiry long overdue
2008-0129 -
Stuff - Trial system in the dock
2008-0129 - United Future -
Ellis deserves Royal Commission of Inquiry - Dunne
2008-0129 -
Radio NZ - Ablett Kerr: Research highlights flaws in interviews 2008-0129 -
NZ Herald - Peter Ellis' lawyers seek Royal Commission 2008-0129
- Newstalk ZB - Ellis' lawyers want Royal Commission of Inquiry 2008-0129
- Nelson Mail - Ellis's lawyers seek royal commission
2008-0127 -
Poneke’s Weblog - Ellis case researcher backs Law Commission call
2008-0112 -
NZ Herald - Psychologist: Ellis case questions were suspect 2008-0112 - NZ Herald
- Call for inquiry into justice system ignored: ex-judge
|
