Northern Territory shonkey Magistrate

Another dodgy Magistrate exposed!!!!

Royal commission: NT acting chief magistrate Michael Carey admits recommendation to drop court action against sex offender did not meet guidelines

By Xavier La Canna

Updated Wed at 9:58amWed 1 Oct 2014, 9:58am

Photo: NT magistrate Michael Carey says he does not know why the decision to drop court action against a sex offender was made so quickly. (Supplied)

Map: Darwin 0800

A Northern Territory magistrate has admitted a recommendation he made in 2002 to drop court action against sex offender Don Henderson was made quickly, and did not meet guidelines.

At the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the NT's Acting Chief Magistrate Michael Carey gave evidence about a memo he sent in 2002 when he worked at the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
The memo sent to the DPP recommends dropping court action against Mr Henderson, a convicted sex offender who the royal commission has heard molested several children who were housed at the Retta Dixon home in Darwin.
The note from Mr Carey in 2002 has been described as "pivotal" to the decision to drop action against Mr Henderson, who was never prosecuted for his alleged crimes while working as a house parent at Retta Dixon.
Under questioning from Counsel Assisting the Commission, Sophie David, Mr Carey agreed the memo failed to adhere to prosecutor guidelines.
He admitted the memo did not, as it was supposed to, include reference or analysis to an application for new trials for Mr Henderson, and nor did it include references to Mr Henderson's history as a sex offender.
The memo also did not include the views of the officer in charge or victims, as guidelines direct.
"You would agree that this memorandum does not comply with the the prosecutor guidelines in respect of what should be in a discontinuance report?" Ms David asked.
"Yes," Mr Carey said.
Mr Carey also admitted the decision in 2002 was made within 24 hours of getting the file on Mr Henderson.
"I don't know why it was done in such haste," Mr Carey said.
Mr Henderson has been linked to scores of child abuse allegations, documents tendered to the commission show.
In 1984 he was convicted of molesting two boys at a public swimming pool in Darwin.

Apology from ministry in charge at Retta Dixon

Reverend Trevor Leggott, the head of the ministry that cared for children at Retta Dixon, has apologised for the sexual and physical abuse they suffered, but said his group could not offer money to victims.
"To hear those stories related to the people that I would call family has been extremely painful for me to hear and that is why I offer the most sincere apologies," Reverend Leggott said.
Reverend Leggott is the general-director of Australian Indigenous Ministry (AIM), whose forerunner, the Aboriginal Inland Mission, ran the Retta Dixon home.
The facility housed mainly Aboriginal children between 1946 and 1980.

I know the hurt that has been caused to these people is not going to be fixed by money.

Reverend Trevor Leggott, head of Australian Indigenous Ministries

Last week the inquiry heard often graphic accounts from nine former Retta Dixon residents who suffered physical or sexual abuse, including numerous examples of alleged abuse by Mr Henderson.
Reverend Leggott said his ministry lived a "hand-to-mouth existence" and did not have the funds available to give compensation payments to victims of abuse at Retta Dixon.
"It seems extremely difficult for me that we can offer it," he told the royal commission.
"I know there can be recompense in terms of money, but I know the hurt that has been caused to these people is not going to be fixed by money," he said.

Ministry has 'substantial number of properties'

Under questioning from Ms David, Reverend Leggott admitted his organisation did own a substantial number of properties in New South Wales, Queensland and the Northern Territory.
But he said most of the properties were held by trusts and local churches - AIM did not own them.
He said the ministry did own some properties itself, including an office in Humpty Doo and a home in the Blue Mountains in NSW, so there was some capacity to set up a compensation scheme.
"Only if we were to realise those assets and that meant that we couldn't do the work that we are doing presently," he said.
To heckles from the public gallery at the Darwin Supreme Court, Reverend Leggott also testified he did know of any abuse at Retta Dixon until he received papers from the royal commission.

Standard of kinship care for Indigenous children 'relaxed'

Earlier the royal commission heard Indigenous children looked after by relatives in the Northern Territory do not recieve the same standard of care as children placed with other carers.
NT Children's Commissioner Howard Bath told the inquiry he generally backed a policy of putting Aboriginal children in need of care with relatives, and if that is not possible then into care with people of the same culture.

Photo: NT Children's Commissioner Dr Howard Bath, who told a royal commission meeting in Darwin of a lower standard of care for Indigenous children. (Supplied)

Despite that principle the inquiry heard that the NT had the lowest placement rate for Aboriginal children with Aboriginal carers in Australia.
Dr Bath said that standards of care in general were lower with kinship carers.
"There are some ways to go before you can say the standard of care offered to those kids, and I am talking generally, is the same as for all other kids that need protection," Dr Bath said.
He said in some very remote communities the disadvantaged circumstances meant it was practically much harder to find a suitable placements and because of the larger size of Aboriginal families, often there were fewer adults able to look after children.
"The reality is some of those standards tend to be relaxed," he said.
"Some of the data that we provided say five years ago showed very clearly that more of the kinship carers weren't registered as carers and more of them had difficulty in terms of receiving training for example, were less likely to recieve training that non-kinship carers."
Asked why the policy of putting Indigenous children into the care of relatives was seen as preferable, Dr Bath said it helped preserve a sense of identity for the child and helped address the "historic mistakes of the past".
He said being with someone of the same cultural background also helped protect a child against the trauma and dislocation after they are removed from their family.