Press Statement
The 12-month ordeal a teacher with 40 years’ experience faced as a result of being falsely charged with indecent assault
because school children fabricated allegations to get him dismissed illustrates the hardship caused to innocent people
when there is a lack of willingness on the part of the Police to properly investigate allegations of sexual abuse. The
case is notable because it was established the complainants accounts were untrue and they admitted lying when
cross-examined.
Defence lawyers have expressed concern that the normal rule of investigation of offences does not seem to apply where
allegations are of a sexual nature and, on the contrary, the complainant’s accounts are not challenged and there seems
to be a widespread assumption that such complainants are always telling the truth with little or no further
investigation required.
While it is appropriate that victims are properly supported, there can be no excuse for failing to carryout a proper
investigation to determine whether there is substance to any allegation that may result in a prosecution. Sexual abuse
allegations are easily made and the effects of an allegation are catastrophic on the person who is accused whatever the
final verdict.
It is no answer to say the system worked for the teacher because he was found not guilty as it seems clear he would not
have been put through the ordeal in the first place if a proper investigation had been carried out.
The falsely charged teacher’s year from hell is a normal experience that any person would face who was charged with a
sexual offence. If he or she is successful in obtaining bail then the bail terms are likely to significantly affect his
or her life and may even prevent employment. It will be at least 12 months before the evidence can be challenged at
trial.
Where there is a child making the allegation, child witness interviewers facilitate the giving of statements on video
and it is not their role to challenge the child or his or her recollection. This emphasises the importance of the Police
carrying out a proper investigation including a proper examination by the Police of the motives and accounts of
complainants instead of uncritically accepting their word that a sexual assault has occurred where the assault is denied
by the defendant.
Defence lawyers do not have the resources of the Crown and there is a real risk of a miscarriage of justice where, for
example, potential eye witnesses are not interviewed as part of the initial investigation.
The justifiable concern as a result of past failures to accept the nature and extent of sexual abuse should not now act
as an impediment to proper investigation of such allegations.
Len Andersen, President CBA