MP Rory McEwen Tries To Get Parents Arrested - March 2006

Please review other posts re St Martins Lutheran School and the various Child Abuse issues it has precipitated, at least one of which refers to Rory McEwen trying to get us arrested for bailing him up on ABC Radio in March 2006, just weeks before the state election, with questions about the cover-up of that abuse.

Below is a verbatim transcript I prepared from the relevant WIN TV News story, clearly stating that Rory had reported us to the Police Commissioner, and that the issue is about us claiming cover-up, not the cover-up itself. He knowingly misrepresents the very genuine anger and frustration of parents as being "gutter politics" generated by Liberal "candidates".

I appreciate that nothing here says specifically that Rory asked Comm Hyde to 'arrest us', but that is the direct inference/consequence of "...police will be contacting the people..." and "Where's your evidence...", etc.

In a mis-dated response 14 months later, the Police Minister Paul Holloway not Police Commissioner Mal Hyde wrote back trotting out the usual misinformation about alleged SAPol investigations, etc, but also raising many concerning points. 

Why didn't Comm Hyde answer that letter? What about the 'Separation of Powers' whereby police and politicians are meant to act very much independently of each other - not answer each others mail over a year late.

Why was "The second investigation ... conducted by the Sexual Crime Investigation Branch?"   (allegedly). Even if there was a genuine investigation, why the hell was the SCIB looking at the behaviour of 50 year old male teacher Glyn Dorling toward the 7 year olds in his care?

What was happening in that classroom in 2002 that would in any way be the business of the SCIB in 2005/06? And most particularly after the Teachers Registration Board/Crown Solicitior completely exonerated Dorling of relatively (allegedly) 'non-sexual' behaviours after a 21 month hearing in 2003/04?

Why did the Anti-Corruption Branch hand my "police corruption allegations" to the SCIB? That simply doesn't make sense...those allegations would have gone back to the Police Complaints Authority at least.

I maintain that SAPol 're-investigated' nothing after originally flatly refusing to conduct any investigation in 2002...I remind readers that Dorling himself acknowledges that he wasn't even formally interviewed, let alone charged, even after he'd already been 'removed'.

Tomorrow: Right and Wrong - Paedophiles and Milk and Bus Shelters

A little bit of 'I told you so' and some 'apparently I'm wrong".

Tomorrow Arvo: TFTIM SAPol Superintendent Mark Fairney