A City Possessed: The Christchurch Civic Creche Case

by Lynley Hood

"Researching and writing this book often felt like the literary equivalent of a solo crossing of Antarctica." Lynley Hood

A City Possessed is a strong, compelling and shocking story about one of New Zealand's most high-profile criminal cases - a story of child abuse allegations, gender politics and the law. In detailing the events and debates leading up to and surrounding the Christchurch Civic Creche case, Lynley Hood shows how such a case could happen, and why. Her penetrating analysis of the social and legal processes by which the conviction of Peter Ellis was obtained, and has been repeatedly upheld, has far-reaching implications - not only for our justice system, but for the way in which we see ourselves.

Genres: Nonfiction

672 pages, Hardcover

First published October 1, 2001

Reviews

[Carol, She's so Novel ꧁꧂ · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5★

Think the Salem Witch Hunts couldn't happen in modern times?

Think again.

A shocking case of mass hysteria.

This book doesn't bother making any pretence of being a dispassionate, unbiased account so neither will I.

When rumours of a Christchurch based cult abusing children and then the (later and separate) allegations against workers at the Christchurch Civic Creche started in the early 90's – I believed them. I was a young mother at the time and one of the messages we absorbed was if your child made any remarks that could remotely be construed as being about sexual abuse – believe your child. I loved my children and thought I was the luckiest woman alive being their mother, but there was always an element of fear. I couldn't be so lucky to parent these wonderful beings, something would have to go wrong. I think these were the subliminal messages I was absorbing.

Further along of course you know children can and will lie about almost anything. In some cases I would call it more make believe and sometimes (and this is important) if you badger children and won't accept an answer of, “I don't know” or “I can't remember” children will say what they believe their parent wants to hear.

I did start wondering when the four woman childcare workers were acquitted, but I didn't start to really doubt till I read some of the children's allegations - & even more when the oldest child accuser recanted and said she had made her claims because she thought that was what her parents wanted to hear. Even though those charges were dismissed there was no move to rehear the other cases. Peter Ellis remained inside. He wouldn't attend parole hearings as he wouldn't admit to something he hadn't done. Most telling was that in most cases NZ prisons are hell on earth for child molesters – but Peter was untouched as his court guards let it be known (after sitting through some of the “evidence”) that they believed he was innocent and the charges were a farrago of nonsense.

Peter Ellis was set up. I think a lot of the problem was parents don't want very young children in the care of males and this book makes serious allegations against the policeman in charge of the investigation. Problems remain to this day in NZ in getting male teachers to teach children of any age. He wasn't released until 2000 and had just received permission to appeal his charges, but died of cancer in September. I hope the appeal still goes forward.

I know I'm making some judgemental comments, but I had to knock off half a ★for a few of Hood's own. The first 167 pages were background info and she describes a child witness as the school gossip. How do you think the child would feel reading this as an adult? And calling Sharon Crosbie a radio diva, sounds like paying off an old score. I also found some of the indexing a little frustrating when I wanted to look things up.

Still a very important read for New Zealanders, but if you aren't interested in all the background (Hood is very thorough) Start reading from about page 167.

Further reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_E...

https://wordpress.com/view/carolshess...

[Zeb · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have to admit I did not read this book cover to cover, there is too much. Why do I still give it five stars? Because Lynley Hood needed to make it somewhat chewy and overworked to dispel accusations that she might not have looked into the case deeply enough. The case being: a man, Peter Ellis, accused of satanic abuse in a childcare-center, where he had worked, and found guilty of some but not all of the accusations. Charges against his female co-workers, originally also accused, were dropped. He got ten years prison, from which he was NOT released early, because he refused to say he was sorry; he showed no regret, ever. He said: How can I show regret for something I never did? (search and see the Peter Ellis website if you want to know more)
Lynley Hood writes this book for everyone who heard about this - which is every single person not living under a rock in New Zealand at the time - who had wondered what was the truth behind this. I had heard about the controversial case of course and thought to myself at the time: the accusations sound like bullshit. No such thing could happen in a childcare center, going on for years, without anyone noticing. Hood proves beyond any reasonable doubt that my gut feeling was correct. NOTHING happened. And she needs to write a bit of a tome to prove that point. She goes into more detail than I care to know, but the parts I did read I learned so much, about the background, about the role of "The Courage to Heal" (the one book on my shelves I included because I HATE it) and the trends this book and others like it promoted, the atmosphere leading to false accusations, other stories like the Ellis case. Lynley Hood deserves an extra ordinary PHD for her work. Apart from that, the book is very nicely edited and crafted, I love the wee woodcuts of a horny devil separating the chapters, I love Hood's style. I love the fact she had the courage to tackle that whole knot of pseudo feminist hysterical man hating nonsense. I regret her book has not led to a proper review of the Ellis case before the courts.
PS, apropos faulty memory syndrome: all the horny devils are on the cover of the book, not one of them between chapters. Our memory is not as accurate as we wish to believe.

[Fiona · Rating 2 out of 5]

Even though I agree with Hood's main point - that Peter Ellis is innocent and his conviction was the result of hyteria, I have serious reservations about this book.

It's hard to believe that she was partially awarded a PhD from Otago University based on the scholarship in this books. She repeatedly calls radio presenter Sharon Crosbie a 'radio diva'. She suggests Christchurch has always been prone to outbreaks of hysteria because of its geographical layout (without any citations). She also suggests the nor'west has an influence. She argues that sexual abuse therapists found sexual abuse everywhere out of self-interest (financial and career). She argues that evidence that sexual abuse has always been taken seriously in NZ, contrary to the assertions of sexual abuse therapist, is evident in how child abuse was reported in the trashy tabloid 'The Truth'. She argues that sexual abuse therapists have authoritarian personality types. These sorts of statements are either ridiculous or unsupported, and as such detract from her argument.

As does the fact that she responded to initial criticism of her scholarship (particularly related to her assertions about the prevalence of child abuse) in NZ Legal Journal by dismissing their concerns as what she'd expect from those invested in 'the sexual abuse industry'.

Hood could have convincingly argued Peter Ellis is innocent and the victim of public hysteria/prejudices without dismissing the whole field of sexual abuse therapy. As it is, she throws the baby out with the bathwater and, in the end, does Peter Ellis a disservice.

[Wyktor Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thorough investigation of one of the worst miscarriages of justice to occur n New Zealand, which has still not been rectified. It's a harrowing story of how one man and numerous children can be abused by the system, and, in the children's case, by the very people who should have been protecting them from abuse; their parents, the interviewers, the police, and the judiciary.
This book is well worth the read, though one will be astounded and disgusted by the revelations in it.

[Ms. Koirala · Rating 1 out of 5]

I only found out about this case a week or so ago, so I am not influenced by media hype or personal knowledge of any parties involved. Going by the reviews though, I must say I don't think people have critically engaged this 'work' nearly enough.

1) Right from the gates Hood refuses to interview the victims if they don't parrot her sentiments of Ellis's "Innocence" and immediately declares the victims and their families as histrionic witch hunters. She also proceeds to morally posture / virtue signal about how much she cares about the truth, yet declares in the first 50 pages (without providing the reader any evidence), that Ellis is innocent.

Her statement on page 35: "To avoid any uncertainty I want to make my position clear from the outset: ... In this story those who believe that terrible events happened at the crèche are wrong."
LOL. At least she was forthcoming about her disinterest in the full story from the get go, but the narcissism to declare she somehow knows the truth is truly something to behold.

2) In typical enabling fashion she shamelessly minimises the damage sexual abuse has on children, dismissing it as just some benign aspect of childhood where the ramifications are just not known. Never mind that a vast majority of women in sex industries (such as porn and prostitution) have admitted to a history of sexual abuse as children. I was expecting Ellis's innocence would be proven by facts directly from the case, not by minimising child abuse. But I guess that's just me.

3) Hood seems to have some infatuation with Ellis and openly displays her sycophantic fixation on him. Sharing personal letters where he displays his 'charismatic' narcissism. She gushes about his eyeliner, long nails, and long hair, and uses the baseline of prison inmates having not murdered him as some sort of indication of his innocence? Since when did we use the opinion/actions of inmates as a character assessment? Am I missing something?

4) She predictably uses this disgusting quote by Freud:

"Under the influence of the technical procedure which I used at that time, the majority of my patients reproduced from their childhood scenes in which they were sexually seduced by some grown up person. With female patients the part of the seducer was almost always assigned to the father. I believed these stories... However, I was at last obliged to recognise that these scenes of seduction had never taken place, and that they were only fantasies which my patients had made up or that I myself had perhaps forced on them"

Is she really asserting that all these victims just had sexual fantasies of Ellis? Did she really think this was a great argument in proving her case? Wew. In all my reading on child abuse, I have only ever seen this quote used by abusers or enablers of abusers. This perspective removes all accountability from the abuser (adult) and conveniently offsets it to the victim (child).
Virginia Woolf, a world famous writer, was sexually abused as a 6 year old child by her two teenaged half-brothers, which her parents refused to acknowledge. Unfortunately, as an adult just when she was coming to terms with what had happened to her, she came across Freud's work stating that what had happened to women like her was not only of their own imagined childhood sexual fantasies, but that they invited it upon themselves. Woolf embraced this and continued to idealise her family. Resulting in such psychological distress she eventually ended her life. I want people to fully understand the damage such a perverted assertion has on victims of sexual abuse.

Sigmund Freud's grandson Clement Freud has been revealed to be a prolific abuser of girls as young as 10. I wonder where he learned such behaviour was acceptable? From his father, and in turn, his father's father, perhaps? Sigmund Freud is an intellectual coward and a charlatan who has set back the understanding of human psychology by a century. His work only further ensnares victims in their shame, leaving them to continue their suffering in silence; which only serves to protect their abuser/s.

I'm only 150 pages in, and while I'm not partial to book burning, Id make an exception in this case.

[Saige]

In spite of the author's prejudice against women who and children who speak up about abuse this book contains evidence of terrible abuse by seasoned abuser. Hood failed to research the case by even asking or seeking any of the victims, She dismisses child sexual abuse as something that - even if it does happen - is no different to any other event in a child's life. A shocking statement by a very poor author who plainly has no moral conscience in relation to this case. If she did, she would have sought out the victims.
Fortunately there are some excellent books available that deal with the issue and eventually there will be a very different book about this case, with the truth that the children were denied by the media and this abuser's defenders. The only controversy about this case has been caused by the media and Hood was part of Ellis's campaign team.
As an investigative journalist I have spent years tracking the case and have concluded as Dr Michael Salter does about the Australian media, the media tends to report from the perspective of the abuser not the victims. It is time that changed. I look forward to reading something of the standard of Catch and Kill by Ronan Farrow, which has some clear parallels with sexual abuse cases in New Zealand.

[Voracious · Rating 3 out of 5]

FINALLY finished this. If you just want to know a bit about the creche case, I would start around page 200. Before that, it's all about feminist politics and the establishment of an over-zealous child protection movement that saw all the experts, interviewers, social workers etc trained to believe kids no matter what, and to push kids into making accusations.

The book seems to be very well researched and put together. Hood provides loads of evidence that the process leading to Ellis' conviction was massively flawed. I find her style a little supercilious, but that's a minor complaint.

Hidden within this mighty tome is the material for a 250-page book that would be accessible to any reader and would convince most, if not all, that the Christchurch Civic Creche case was a hysterical witch hunt. Because of its heft, though, I suspect that the book has not been read as much as the topic deserves.

[Emma · Rating 5 out of 5]

Meticulous and compelling. I didn't agree with all her analysis (particularly as to the background) but the analysis of the case itself is a masterpiece of clear and insightful investigative journalism. It's hard to believe it took 20 more years for Ellis to be cleared by the Supreme Court, and I can only feel sorry for the children and families who were caught up in the mess.

[Dat-Dangk Vemucci · Rating 2 out of 5]

An important subject but the reportage is like reading a bunch of bus tickets and receipts

[Cheryl McConnell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Left me feeling concerned about the Justice system, that lives by the idea they can do no wrong, that they don't make mistakes, how incestuous NZ is by virtue of it's small size, how conspiracy theories take off. But the worst aspect was the destruction of families in a 20 century witch hunt. My heart went out to all those involved especially the children. Extraordinary research and insightful comment by Lynley.

[Michael Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

This scholarly investigation of into the 1993 conviction of childcare worker Peter Ellis for sexual abuse is one of the very best New Zealand true crime books. The "true crime" in this case was a miscarriage of justice that was not rectified until Ellis was finally exonerated by the Supreme Court in 2022. In the meantime, he had died, some 18 years after completing his sentence and being released.

The author Lynley Hood spent years researching the case and it shows in her thorough, thoughtful, and rigorous write-up. As she details, the Civic Creche case was linked to a "satanic panic" phenomenon that swept through various countries in the 1980s and 1990s. Preschools became seen as potential sites where malign cults subjected young children to ritual abuse, usually imagined in the most fantastical, lurid and unbelievable terms. Innocent childcare workers were convicted and then later exonerated, once clearer heads prevailed. The Peter Ellis case was New Zealand's turn.

There had already been several inconclusive ritual abuse investigations in Christchurch in the late 1980s (nothing was found). Then, in 1991, the rather flamboyant Ellis became the perfect scapegoat for the combined forces of panicking parents, doctrinaire social workers/counselors obsessed with child sex abuse, and the conservative establishment of police and judiciary.

Hood shows how the case was on one level the outcome of a witch-hunt dynamic, in which rumours swirled, parent's and children's memories becoming irretrievably contaminated. It was also a systematic structural failure in which the medical establishment, government agencies, police, justice system, and politicians were all implicated. None of the those involved have ever faced much scrutiny, although the Supreme Court singled out a crucial Crown expert witness: she had failed to disclose under oath her deep misgivings around the "evidence" of disclosures made by children repeatedly primed, led, and encouraged to identify Ellis. It's a travesty that no wide-ranging inquiry into the case has ever been held. Hood's book may be the closest we ever get.

[Barbs · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredibly well researched book not only about the case itself but also the social climate in Christchurch at the time. This part was was really interesting as it showed why the hysteria developed and how, even intelligent people were influenced by what was happening overseas and also one or two professionals. Having lived here during that time I remember the controversy around the case at the time and the bias of a lot of the Press coverage. It is so sad that Peter Ellis died before clearing his name and the other accused creche women had their livelihood and reputation destroyed.

[Helen Cummings · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is such a thorough, well documented account of the Civic Crèche Case and the huge disquiet among New Zealanders about what happened in the trial. There is a huge sense of unease about the whole saga and it really bought home to me how unjust the outcome was. Very insightful and comprehensive and such an interesting read.

[Ang · Rating 5 out of 5]

Trigger warning-child sexual assault information throughout the book.
Heavy and thought provoking reading.
This book is very well written, in an analytical and clear way.
Despite the topic, never a nice thing to read, it has definitely made me think, talk to others, and analyse this and other cases in NZ were things aren't always what they first appear.

[Sylvie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Utterly harrowing

[Denise Te · Rating 4 out of 5]

Miscarriage of Justice and peoples prejudice blinded by misinformation

[John Aitchison · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book 10 years ago shortly after moving to NZ and knowing nothing about Peter Ellis. I found myself living in the same village as him and next door to a gentleman who had been a court reporter at Peter's original trial. He was convinced of Peter's innocence and recommended I read A City Possessed.
I read the book with an open mind and found it an engrossing dissection of the events prejudicing a fair trial.
Lynley Hood's conclusion that there had been a miscarriage of justice were vindicated in October 2022 when the Supreme Court quashed Peter Ellis's conviction. The tragedy is that Peter was not alive to hear the verdict. This was the first time that a conviction has been quashed posthumously in New Zealand.