Two of the children lived with a caregiver in the remote Far North town of Pawarenga. Photo / Peter de Graaf
Two of the children lived with a caregiver in the remote Far North town of Pawarenga. Photo / Peter de Graaf
WARNING: This article deals with child abuse and may be upsetting to some readers.
The fate of three Oranga Tamariki caregivers is in the balance after four children accused them of abuse, claiming saying they were hit, spat on and run over by a quadbike.
The defence argues the children conspired after one was suspected of trying to steal a car.
The trial against the three caregivers, who are facing a combined 52 charges of multiple violent acts towards the children, is in its third week at the Kaikohe District Court.
The jury is currently deciding its verdicts.
The elderly husband, Steve* and his wife, Allison* lived in Taipā had two children staying with them over various periods while their son, Bill* lived in Pawarenga and had another two children, but they would move between both homes.
A fifth child, who had stayed with the couple briefly, also gave evidence at the trial.
The jury heard evidence from all the children - now adults - concerning allegations they were hit, slapped, spat at, hit with a black pipe and made to stand on a tree stump for up to three hours at a time.
One complainant alleged he was run over by a quad bike, driven by Bill, then dragged onto the back of the bike and beaten. The boy eventually ran away with another complainant.
The Crown case
In closing submissions to the jury on Tuesday, Crown prosecutor Alex Goodwin said there was no way five children had got together and come up with stories and the jury needed to pay attention to the timeline of events.
The Crown timeline had two children running away from Steve and Alison then later another child reported abuse by the same caregivers. Later that child and another child who was placed with them also ran away and were picked up by Oranga Tamariki.
“There are differences in their evidence but that shows they have not colluded with each other. The differences does not make it unreliable, you need to consider it in the context of the abuse occurring. They were in state care, they were vulnerable,” Goodwin said.
“What one kid might think is bad, another might think is normal... They’re different ages, they have different ways of communicating.”
‘It is the defendants that are liars’
Goodwin said the evidence was consistent, which exposed an isolated life behind closed doors.
“They told you about life that not everybody saw, the life that was kept behind closed doors when they were placed into that environment by Oranga Tamariki.
“The evidence from those kids is consistent, credible and reliable. The Crown says those kids are telling the truth. It is the defendants that are liars.”
Bill’s lawyer Martin Hislop said the allegations started when one of the children decided he no longer wanted to be there and was caught trying to steal a car and then implicated the other children in his story.
The Defence case
“If he [Bill] would have run over that child’s legs, he would have needed medical help. He would not have been standing on the stump as he suggested. It’s a lie.”
Hislop said only one social worker was called to give evidence, who could only recall seeing one bruise on one of the children.
“Where are the other social workers? Why aren’t they here? I’ll tell you why because there were no concerns.
“The fact these children were in state care, please don’t let that have prejudice. Don’t have sympathy for what they may have been in. Were they abused? The defence says ‘No, they were not.”
The children were in state care through Oranga Tamariki. Photo / Jason Oxenham
Steve’s lawyer Grant Anson said the jury needed to focus on the specific charges related to his client to be confident in convictions.
The children had made allegations that Steve had spat in a child’s face after he had a disclosure meeting with Oranga Tamariki, was pulled out of the car into the house and repeatedly called ‘n***** nuts’.
Anson said the term was used in jest and as the child was part Māori, it might be terminology used in the privacy of their own home.
Anson reminded the jury of one of the complainant’s evidential interviews, in which she admitted she was high on drugs and had given conflicting statements throughout the trial.
‘The children were damaged’
Anson said she had possibly formed visuals in her head for stories that were not true, a theory she rejected when giving evidence.
“I’m going to guess when you heard these children ran away from their placements you thought ‘something bad must have happened,” Anson said to the jury.
“It can be really difficult when you get that first thought in your head how do you move it? Now we’re at the end of this process, you know things now you didn’t know at the start of this case.
“How for these children running was a behaviour, running is just something they do.”
Anson said when you fit all the children’s stories together, they did not mesh.
The children would go between two houses in Taipā, just outside of Kaikohe, and Pawarenga an hour and a half away. Photo / NZME
Steve’s wife also faced multiple allegations, including of one incident in which she had allegedly strangled one of the girls in her care. Her lawyer Hugh Leabourn said his client had tried to calm the girl after she got angry she could not go swimming.
“We all know young people who get placed in foster care for many different reasons and not for good reasons.
“None of their previous environments were healthy or normal. You’re wrong to think their behaviour would be normal, rational, calm, predictable and not erratic when they first arrived.
“I submit the children were damaged. Sometimes violent and difficult to manage. They were not good at following rules or listening to instructions.”
Leabourn said there were eyes all over the children from multiple social workers, teachers, dentists, family members and independent visitors and the idea they were shut off from the world was not true.
“There were eyes on these children regularly and often ... Not a single person on all those eyes can confirm any injuries or impact on these children at any stage.
“Who do you believe? Who do you place weight on and who you don’t? Or do you simply say ‘I can’t accept that evidence’?”
The jury began its deliberations on Wednesday.
*Names have been suppressed pending final suppression orders.
Shannon Pitman is a Whangārei based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the Te Tai Tokerau region. She is of Ngāpuhi/ Ngāti Pūkenga descent and has worked in digital media for the past five years. She joined NZME in 2023.
