Patients Give Evidence At Cherry Farm Inquiry (Press, 7 August 1963)

An inquiry commenced at Cherry Farm Hospital in Dunedin on 6 August 1963, focusing on serious allegations of favouritism, maltreatment, victimisation, and homosexuality involving a member of the hospital's staff. The inquiry is being led by Mr. W. H. Reid, a local solicitor and district inspector under the Mental Health Act. Counsel has been appointed to represent various parties, including staff, former staff, and patients. On the first day, five patients and three doctors provided testimonies. Mr. Reid has mandated that the identities of the witnesses be kept confidential and has the authority to limit the publication of evidence he deems sensitive. A subpoena issued to the editor of “Truth” resulted in the inquiry receiving information regarding 15 individuals who had communicated with the newspaper, with Mr. R. J. Gilbert representing 13 of these. Prior to the evidence being presented, Mr. J. Joel, the lawyer for one of the accused staff, expressed concerns about the nature of the inquiry. He argued that the process appeared more like a trial, lacking specific allegations, which he believed contradicted principles of British justice. He suggested that the accusations may have originated from anonymous correspondence to the press. Mr. Joel characterised his client, a Swiss national, as a respected figure who may have been targeted due to his success and minority status. The inquiry saw contentious exchanges between counsel, particularly around the questioning style. Witnesses began to recount their experiences, with one patient alleging indecency and cruelty relating to an incident while in a musical group. Another patient, aged 18 and previously a practising homosexual, alleged he was indecently assaulted twice by the nurse in question. This witness noted his tendency to fabricate statements but asserted that he would be truthful while under oath. Further testimonies identified complaints about the nurse’s conduct, with one witness claiming he spoke to a doctor regarding the nurse’s actions, who downplayed the situation by suggesting the nurse suffered from some form of illness. This witness was also questioned about his criminal history, which included convictions for assault, and acknowledged a past membership in a Nazi youth organisation. A medical officer testified that he was friendly with the nurse, and while he acknowledged the latter’s gifts to patients, he insisted that the nurse had a positive reputation among many of them. Another witness, a 15-year-old patient, denied any incidents of indecency involving the nurse while acknowledging he had been struck in the past. As the hearing continues, it remains to be seen how the various allegations and testimonies will impact the inquiry's progress and outcomes. The case highlights significant concerns regarding treatment and conduct within mental health care settings during this period.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand