1997: Ritual abuse allegation substantiated in NSW Australia

[biaothanatoi]

Information courtesy of <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.smuggled.com/nswpol1.htm" target="top">Smuggled</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->. <br><br>The following is a summary of a case which was brought to the attention of the NSW Police Service and the Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service in the late 1980s and early 1990s. <br><br>In 1989, a six year old attending an inner city fundamentalist Christian church in NSW stated that he and his sister were taken to the back room of the church, where he recalled:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"a star on the ground..it had five points with a circle around it with candles on each point...then they told me to roll over onto my stomach then Ian L. stuck his dick in my bum...then later on they gave me magic crystals to put in my mothers drink and they told me not to tell anyone anything or they will kill my family".</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>The alarm was raised by the child's seven year old sister, who was present at the alleged rape, and informed her mother, workers at the Department of Community Services, and the attending doctors at the Children's Hospital in Camperdown. Medical evidence congruent with anal penetration was documented. <br><br>The police investigation lasted 16 months. The children were not interviewed until twelve months after the date of the original notification, and perpetrators involved were not formally interviewed. The police informed the mother of the children that they could not press charges due to the nature of "children's evidence". <br><br>A police officer involved in the case was called to give evidence to the Police Royal Comission regarding the matter, and he falsely stated that the boy involved was not the subject of medical examination.<br><br>Sydney Morning Herald journalist Richard Guilliat downplayed the case at a Syndey conference on paedophilia after interviewing the police officer involved, but not the mother of the child.<br><br>In a letter to the Victims Compensation Tribunal (July 9 1992) Ms Deidre Grusovin M.P stated:<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"My lasting impression is that (the mother) and her family have been subjected to extraordinary and unnecessary abuse by the system. At times during this whole sorry saga, there seemed to be concerted attempts by a number of agencies involved to discredit (the mother), presumably in order to justify their own inaction or inability to deal effectively with the genuine concerns of a parent who feared for the well being of her children, and of other children she believed to be in a situation of risk."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>On Monday 18th August 1997 the NSW District Court found the above allegations were substantiated and awarded Victims Compensation (Criminal Compensation) in this matter. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

What was the basis of the decision? It looks like, from that article, the basis was that the system was not responsive...or was actually harmful in its response...but was there any indication of findings of fact related to the case itself? I think it's particularly interesting since it was in a church. Were the premises ever searched? <p></p><i></i>

[biaothanatoi]

I don't know the ins and outs of the case - I came across it in a set of books written by a well-known Australian whistleblower.<br><br>There is no opportunity to establish the facts of the case in a court of law - the acknowledgement of the investigative inadequacies came, as you can see, eight years after the offense. The lapse between the issuing of charges and the arrest of suspects has been identified as crucial in ritual abuse cases, since it provides time for suspects to dispose of evidence. In this case, perpetrators had almost a decade.<br><br>However, medical evidence of penetration, alongside the corroborating account of his sister of the ritualistic nature of the rape, provides convincing evidence that ritual abuse took place. This was established in the compensation claim - that the case deserved investigation and was not adequately taken up by police - hence the payout. <p></p><i></i>