Welcome to the Civic
Protest
On this page you can read about how all citizens of
You can also read about the stand others have chosen to make
as a result of the convictions and against future similar injustices.
You can learn how you can also make known
to the
Background
Due to illogical
arguments permitted
under section 23G of the Evidence Act and due to questionable
investigative and judicial processes that conspired to keep significant
information from being presented in court, the jury in the Ellis trial arrived
at verdicts that are patently wrong. That is a conclusion that has
been reached by an overwhelming majority of scholars [1] who have
researched the wider aspects of the case and is also now recognised by the
majority of New Zealanders. [National
Business Review-Compaq poll, May 2002]
The judicial system has proved itself incapable of self-correction and has instead adopted a siege mentality. The reputations of many of the individuals and processes involved stand to be brought into question. The authorities have a vested interest in upholding the convictions. Phil Goff, former Minister of Justice, says a Royal Commission of Inquiry is not necessary. This is in contrast to the Court of Appeal, which said it was unable to consider some aspects of the case and advised that only a wide-ranging inquiry could do so.
In the Ministry of Justice’s response to
the 2003 petition calling for a Commission of Inquiry, Val Sim - then chief
legal advisor to the minister - wrote that a commission of inquiry is unlikely
to arrive at the truth regarding allegations of sexual abuse at the Civic
crèche. This is an acknowledgment of the existence of reasonable doubt and it
implies that she has no faith in such an inquiry upholding Ellis’ convictions.
Parliament's Justice and Electoral Select
Committee (2005) concluded that "the operation of the legal system in
respect of this case did not inspire adequate public confidence in the
operation of the legal system. A justice system should lead to certainty. In
this case it seemed to increase the sense of uncertainty."
In the Ellis case the justice system’s stance is now driven
by expediency and finality
rather than by the delivery of justice. Officials believe that
certainty in outcome contributes toward maintaining the public’s faith in the
judicial process. However, the system’s refusal to acknowledge failings in this
case is having the opposite effect, it is eroding the public’s confidence in
its processes.
The
While the convictions of Peter Ellis stand, all New
Zealanders who sit on juries run the risk of complicity in similarly
irreversible miscarriages of justice.
If you, as a juror, make the wrong
decision, as jurors did in the Ellis case, you will have to live with the
knowledge that not only have you sent an innocent person to prison but that the
judicial system will do everything it can, even against the balance of
evidence, to uphold that conviction.
Are you prepared to convict an accused on
the basis of unscientific testimony from a so-called expert witness, on the
basis of a flawed police investigation, on the basis that you may be denied
access to evidence prejudicial to the prosecution, and on the basis that a
wrongful conviction is highly unlikely to be overturned?
Action
You can avoid risking such complicity and by doing so also
support the effort to overturn Peter Ellis's convictions.
How?
- simply by the application of honourable ethics and the principle of passive
resistance. Here is how it works:
When called for jury service you
should take the opportunity during the selection process to inform the bench (judge)
that the outcome of the Ellis case makes
you highly reluctant to risk putting yourself in a position similar to that of
the jurors in the Ellis trial. Therefore you would be reluctant to convict the accused in any trial.
If possible let fellow members of the jury selection pool know of your
intention.
It is highly unlikely that you will be selected for the
jury. You will be able to go home or return to work with clear conscience.
This action is legal and ethical. Section
16C of the Juries Act 1981 states that a juror may be excused: “If the Judge is
satisfied that the person objects to jury service on grounds of conscience,
whether or not of a religious character.” (for further grounds see following link) Others
concerned over the unresolved Ellis case injustice have recently informed the
Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of such an intent, their
concerns were acknowledged and they were advised what action they could take to
excuse themselves from jury service.
You will be doing the court a service by alerting it to a
source of possible bias within the jury.
In effect you will also be issuing a statement of no confidence in the judicial system, one that
will continue as long as the Ellis convictions stand. The judicial system may
well take notice of this protest as it is directed at the system's very heart -
the jury itself.
It is hoped many will take up this stand and that those who
do so inform others of this protest action.
IMPORTANT: inform the judicial system of your
intention; copy and paste the following
letter and email to your selection of:
Simon Power, Minister of Justice,
Freepost Parliament,
simonpower.feilding@xtra.co.nz
Jeff Orr, Chief Legal Adviser,
Ministry of Justice jeff.orr@justice.govt.nz
Chris Finlayson, Attorney General,
Freepost Parliament,
You may choose to also inform other members of Parliament
www.clerk.parliament.govt.nz/YourMP/ListMPs/
DO NOT forget to include your name.
Download printable
version (pdf file, right click ‘choose save target as…’ save, then open and
print) you will require acrobat reader, free from Adobe.com
Please inform others who may be interested in
joining you in such an action. Let them know of your decision and the reasons
for it, pass on this web address.
This initiative by Richard J Christie of Christchurch,
Jonathon Harper of Wellington, New Zealand. (Link to Critique
of Eichelbaum Report and Matters Arising from the Ellis Convictions by J.
Harper and R. Christie).
Select, Copy
and Paste the following letter into an email or reword to your requirements:
[Insert your name
address here]
Date
Re Peter Ellis case and Jury Service
Dear Sir/Madam,
I write to express my loss of confidence in aspects of
the judicial system due to the system's failure to rectify the miscarriage of justice
caused to Mr Peter Ellis and his co workers in the Christchurch Civic Child
Care Centre case.
Until Mr Ellis is pardoned and he and co workers
compensated, or a Royal Commission of Inquiry overseen by a judge from outside
New Zealand is set up to inquire into all circumstances of the case, I cannot
allow myself to be placed in the same position as the jurors in the Ellis case.
I cannot, in good conscience, find for the prosecution whilst the
I cannot legally refuse jury service if called.
However, I notify you that I will make my extreme reluctance to convict known
to both Judge, counsel and fellow jury pool members during the selection
process.
I fail to see how I will then qualify as being
suitable to sit in any jury.
Yours faithfully,
[your name]