Inquisition 21
 |
 |
|
|
| Log In
|
|
|
|
|
| Search Articles
|
|
|
|
|
| Comments
|
|
|
You don't have to,
but if you log in,
you can add comments.
|
| Page Referral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Country by country
|
|
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
A country by country report on the progress of the sex abuse Inquisition
Graham Cleghorn writes from Cambodian prisons
Serious questions for the New Zealand Embassy
Disturbing new background information about Graham Cleghorn
In the mid 1990s, Graham Cleghorn took a visiting middle aged American woman film star on a tour of the famous Angkor Wat Temple in Cambodia. They communicated by email for the next two years. She then returned to Cambodia convinced that he would marry her and go back to the US with her, despite the Cambodian wife by his side. He claims that he never encouraged her to believe this and that the notion was entirely her own creation.
When he told her that there was no possibility of such an outcome, she behaved as an angry woman scorned. She began to call him a paedophile, and before leaving his house copied his email address list. After one row with him, she moved into the Freedom Hotel in Siem Reap for a couple of days. When she wanted to leave to go to the airport, the hotel owners refused to let her go without settling her bill. They called Graham to find out whether he was supposed to settle the bill on her behalf, which he denied. At this point they told her they were not returning her passport and called the police. Unable to catch her flight, she went to complain to a Human Rights office in Siem Reap. The police sent a file to the court in Siem Reap. At that stage, the Funcinpec governor intervened and her passport was released from the court to allow her to travel back to the US.
This could have been a most significant development. Mu Sochua, ex-Minister for Women’s affairs, was both a member of the Funcinpec Party and founder of the Cambodian Women’s Crisis Centre (CWCC). This may have been the beginning of the plot to set up Graham Cleghorn as the first high profile and wealthy paedophile. If so it would have progressed later to ensnare both Bart Lauwaert and Clint Betterridge.
With her passport back, just before leaving, she sent an email to everyone on Graham Cleghorn’s mailing list claiming that he was a child abuser, that he had been abused himself by his father and that he was violent and abusive to his Cambodian wife. Only later when friends warned him about the emails they had received did he realize the extent of the damage. One of the recipients was the New Zealand Embassy in Bangkok.
Questions for the New Zealand Embassy
Did the New Zealand Ambassador or any staff discuss Graham Cleghorn and the defamatory email about him with child rights activist Denise Ritchie during one of her visits representing New Zealand’s Ecpat to Bangkok? Or with any other person in a child right organization? We noted that Denise Ritchie was quick to attack Graham Cleghorn recently during the first TV news story about his appeal and that she mentioned the embassy’s involvement in his case, implying that the embassy believed him guilty. She also displayed knowledge of the embassy’s actions during the arrest of Cleghorn.
This is what was said on TV3 Evening News, Saturday 27 November 2004 in New Zealand.
TV journalist: But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs says it has no reason to doubt the convictions. Nor does child abuse campaigner Denise Ritchie who was briefed by staff at New Zealand's Bangkok Embassy the week Cleghorn was convicted in February.
(Editor - briefed by staff at the embassy. Why?)
Denise Ritchie: The Ambassador did tell me that he had sent one of the Embassy staff over to monitor the trial. One would expect that, if there was any perception of a miscarriage of justice, the New Zealand Embassy would be one of the first people to be jumping up and down.
(Editor. Why was Denise Ritchie in discussions with the embassy and ambassador? Are self-appointed child rights activists in NZ now elevated to government and judicial positions? This is criminal.)
If this TV report and Denise Ritchie are to be believed and the New Zealand Embassy has been involved in this way in discussions with Ecpat, or with any other child rights activists, about Graham Cleghorn, this is a very serious matter. The organization that set up and caused Graham Cleghorn to be convicted is a sister organization to Ecpat, or at least in the same political camp, the Cambodian Women’s Crisis Centre (CWCC). If the embassy was involved, it means that it unwittingly or carelessly allowed itself to be drawn into a conspiracy of extortion and deception that led to the conviction of its own citizen, Graham Cleghorn, and the two Australians, Bart Lauwaert and Clint Betterridge.
We already believe that there was Ecpat involvement or cooperation with Amnesty International in SE Asia, who now probably also want these three cases to go away. In addition to Denise Ritchie, there was another active member of Ecpat, Miriam Saphira of the Christchurch Civic Crèche case fame, involved in SE Asian activities.
Well, they are not going away.
The appeal of December 6 2004
(This is from handwritten notes made by Graham Cleghorn in the Phnom Penh court and handed to Rudolf Knuchel, an observer with an interest in the CWCC.)
The New Zealand embassy sent two people to observe my trial. I have obtained their report under the Official Information Act and am very disappointed with its content or more importantly its lack of content. What is missing from the report is that the alleged rapes took place two years before my arrest and that the women never claimed any use of force. The ‘rape’ that is alleged is that they had sex because they thought if they did not they may lose their jobs. No such threat was ever made and no sex occurred.
The report states that we had legal representation in court. It omits that fact that my lawyer never spoke once. Not to question or cross examine their evidence. Nor would they permit the seven witnesses I had in court to testify in my defence. The seven witnesses had also been offered $10,000 each to testify against me but had refused.
My wife received a three year suspended sentence subject to the girls being paid compensation. If it is not paid, $2,000 to each girl, she is to be re-arrested to serve her sentence in prison. She was offered immunity to prosecution by the court if she would make a statement that I was a rapist. She refused preferring to accompany me to jail. The Siem Reap court told her if she said I was a rapist she could keep our land - - - . (Possible break in message)
The land is to be sold out from under her and the complainants paid. That is why they are still hanging in there against me for the promise of money. Eight (should be eighty?) year’s salary each.
Further information I requested under the Official Information Act has been refused. The embassy is using a loophole which is section 29 (1) (a) of the privacy act which states: “An agency may refuse to disclose any information requested if the disclosure of the information would involve the unwarranted disclosure of the affairs of another individual or of a deceased person.”
This didn’t stop the Ambassador discussing my case with a self-appointed child abuse campaigner named Denise Ritchie who was briefed by staff at the New Zealand Embassy. Between them they concluded that I was guilty. They will not discuss my case with me, but will discuss it with a self-appointed child abuse campaigner. As for assistance from the embassy, their policy is they cannot, do not, and will not interfere or comment on the judicial process of any other country.
Most New Zealanders would be as I were and believe that our embassies would ensure we were treated fairly. The New Zealand embassies stand on this is in keeping with what I have been told by other embassies, namely England and Australia
The nurses’ evidence in the trial was not of a medical nature Their evidence was that the woman complainants visited their clinic to receive birth control injections every three months.
(His notes also said that the appeal court broke for lunch from 11AM to 2.15PM)
Rudolf Knuchel reports on the appeal
Appeal - Mr. Graham Robert Cleghorn - Appeal Court Phnom Penh - Monday the 6th December 2004
The Appeal hearing started at 9 am on Monday morning. Prior to that, Mr. Cleghorn was brought to court in a van with sirens turned on, surrounded with high security personnel, wearing prison guards' uniforms and carrying AK 47 riffles.
When the presiding Judge, Saly Theara (a total of three judges, all men) opened the session, a call went out for the Interpreter of Mr. Cleghorn to approach the Bar. No person came forward.
The presiding Judge, Theara, then asked my personal assistant, Mr. Sorm Chan Thy, to approach the Bar. Mr. Chan Thy was asked whether he is the Interpreter for Mr. Cleghorn, which he denied. The presiding Judge Theara then asked my personal Assistant whether he could interpret for Mr. Cleghorn or whether he is a here as the Interpreter of one of the Embassies. I was then asked by Judge Theara if I agree to use my Assistant to interpret which I politely refused by standing up in the court room and saying “No”.
Mr. Sorm Chan Thy accompanied me to the Appeal Court as my Interpreter allowing me to follow the procedures in the courtroom.
Now the presiding Judge Theara called the persons accusing Mr. Cleghorn of rape to the Bar. A total of 5 persons responded. Three of them were the remaining girls accusing and when the other two girls names where called out their mothers stood since the girls, Lin and Na, where not present anymore in court. It is my understanding that Lin escaped from the CWCC and her whereabouts are unknown today, and that Na has a husband of long time with whom she has a child of more than one year of age.
Judge Theara asked each of them their name and age. The age stated by the three accusing girls present and the two mothers standing up on behalf of their absent daughters was that all of them are 15 years old. Judge Theara looked at his court documents and said the ages given right now are all different from the ages stated in the court documents. (The ages stated, where much younger than previously given to the court in Siem Reap for the initial trial.)
Judge Theara pointed this out and said: “OK under these circumstances we can not have the appeal today”, allowed one month time at most, and demanded from the accusers to provide the court with birth certificates and family books.
After this he adjourned the Appeal. He instructed the lawyers to have every thing ready not later than one month from today and the appeal court will inform of a new appeal date very soon.
My personal comments on all of this
I believe that the decision to adjourn the appeal of today went in favor of Mr. Cleghorn.
1. It will allow his defense to better prepare for the appeal. Mr. Natch Tree entered the courtroom without greeting his client and without ever having spoken to him. Mr. Cleghorn at the beginning could not identify his lawyer!
2. The fact that there was no Interpreter present or available is alarming for the least. One could think that basic human rights would, in the case of a foreigner accused in one country, provide the same with a court appointed lawyer and if this foreigner does not speak the language of this country, the court would also provide a court appointed Translator, to allow a fair hearing.
3. The demand of the court to be provided with birth certificates and family books of the accusers is a very positive move. The attempt by the CWCC and their lawyers, by instructing their clients (accusing women) to reduce their age to 15, when their real age were given earlier as 17,18 and 22, is simply asking people to lie in a court of law. It is also further prove of the madness in their methods used and becoming fast a routine pattern applied by this organization again and again. One will understand that since there are now underage girls accusing, the age of the three had to be reduced so that now they fall in the underage category.
4. Unfortunately obtaining a birth certificate and family book or changing entries in the same are very easy obtainable and where complications could arise a little financial support will do nicely and go a long way.
Siem Reap, 6th December 2004
Signed by Rudolf Knuchel, an observer with an interest in the CWCC.
Comments from the girls outside the court
The witnesses who were not allowed to testify by the court at the December 6 2004 appeal of Graham Cleghorn in Phnom Pen Cambodia spoke on the steps of the courthouse and now write and sign this (translated) statement to the President of the Court of Appeals.
KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA Nation Religion King
We, the undersigned, To Her Excellency the President of the Court of Appeals
Subject: Request clarification of the case of Cleghorn Graham Robert, also known as REM, who was accused of the act of rape;
With regard to the above subject, we would hereby like to affix our right thumbprints as evidence in order to support Cleghorn Graham Robert, also known as REM, New Zealander, who was charged with the act of rape and was convicted by the Siem Reap Provincial Court without any justice.
As a matter of fact, we would like to inform Your Excellency that the organization CWCC prepared a plan for us in order to accuse and sue Cleghorn Graham Robert, also known as REM, without any facts at all. Moreover, the said organization also asked us to provide fake evidence and responses in order to sue Cleghorn Graham Robert, also known as REM, in an effort to extort money from the aforesaid foreigner. This organization ordered us to act following their instructions and pledged to give us much money. However, this organization cheated for its own sake. Moreover, Madame the Director of CWCC assured us that we did not have to worry, for the judge of Siem Reap province was her younger sibling.
With reference to the above information, Your Excellency is kindly requested to seek justice for Cleghorn Graham Robert, also known as REM, so that he may be free from such accusations, as he is an honest man who helps us unemployed Cambodian children.
Yours truly,
December 5, 2004
Right thumbprints
(Thumbprint)
KOEN SOVEY (Thumbprint)
KOEN SOVIE (Thumbprint)
THUOK SOM ANG (Thumbprint)
VE SREYNUON (Thumbprint)
LIM SREYMAP (Thumbprint)
POEL PIEN (Thumbprint)
HIEN TUON (Thumbprint)
RON LANG
(We have the original statement in the Picture gallery.)
Original story
(Note that he is no longer in Siem Reap Prison)
We were temporarily barred from contact with two prisoners inside Siem Reap Prison when our courier carrying messages to and from them was barred from contact by the Prison Chief. Thankfully, we are again in contact with Graham Cleghorn inside Siem Reap Prison and we now have more on the illegality of certain activities of the NGOs in Cambodia.
The new information has been added to the bottom of the warning message from Graham Cleghorn below.
To all NGOs and embassies, with reference to the Cambodian Women Crisis Center (CWCC)
Allegations have been made directly to his Excellency the Prime Minister Samdech Hun Sen and to the Human Rights Commission of Cambodia through the media and by mail by ten juvenile girls.
These girls are now saying that they were forced bribed and coerced by the Cambodian Women Crisis Center, also know as CWCC, to make false accusations of sexual assault against foreigners, and to give false evidence in the District Court resulting in the conviction of foreigners.
Since the letters were published in the national press, more witnesses have come forward with similar stories.
They all allege that these activities were committed by the CWCC, to increase their foreign aid and funding.
Please visit Inquisition 21st century. and FEER.
Also see the article in the French national press Le Cambodge Soir of 13.09.04, in which criticisms of the NGOs and volunteers in Siem Reap are highlighted.
Many NGOs, individuals and embassies have in the past with good intentions assisted the CWCC and facilitated their operations with aid, equipment and training with good intentions.
In view of this new evidence I wish to draw your attention to:
article 69of the Untac law – complicity
which states
“Whoever has provided the means by which an offence is committed or facilitates commission of the offence shall be considered an accomplice.”
and
article 36 – organized crime
“Any individual, who has taken part in a formal or informal association set up for the purpose of planning one or more crimes against a person or property, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment from three to fifteen years.”
Any further assistance to the CWCC should be halted temporarily until a full investigation into the organization is completed.
Continued such assistance could eventually damage your own reputation, that of your organization or your Government.
Graham Robert Cleghorn
Siem Reap Prison, the 23rd September 2004
Commentary
UNTAC was established by a UN Security Council resolution on 28 February 1992, to ensure the implementation of the agreements on a comprehensive political settlement of the Cambodia conflict. UNTAC finished its term in 2003, but several laws that it put in place were maintained by the Cambodian government. This means that the two Articles above quoted by Cleghorn are still law and therefore both the NGOs involved in illegal activity and those international organizations providing them with funds are breaking the law. This should be fully established when the appeals of the convicted men succeed, or when the girls who have retracted bring an action against the NGO, or when the Cambodian government itself honours the law.
Corruption in Cambodia
Graham Cleghorn
(Sentenced to 20 years in prison in Cambodia on the basis of false accusations)
To understand what is happening in Siem Reap in Cambodia, it is necessary to look at the overall picture. Rather than just look at individual cases, it started when the judge Tan Senarong was transferred to Siem Reap. He was the only person at the District Court who spoke English. So all cases involving foreigners were handled by him. Just after his arrival there were a number of cases of tourists from a guest house that rented motor cycles. While the tourist was in the temple, the motor cycle would be stolen. The guest house would demand $800 for each missing bike. When the tourist would refuse, he would be taken to the local court. Judge Tan Senarong would first ask the tourist to present his passport, and would not return it until the money was paid. After the tourist left Cambodia, the motor cycle would reappear at the guest house. At the same time, the Cambodian Woman’s Crisis Center (CWCC) opened an office in Siem Reap. The year was around 1999. Unknown to the expat community at the time was the fact that the CWCC office was opened by Ten Senarong’s sister, Tan Senara.
At this time, only two foreigners owned property in Siem Reap. One was myself, the other was a Swiss hotelier, Rudolf Knuchel. (Story in menu, bottom of page)
After Knuchel’s arrest, Tan Senarong was attending English lessons at the Australian Center for Education. He told his English teacher that I was next on the hit list. When I heard this, I went to the court. Judge Tan Senarong asked for the list of the title to my properties. I refused. He said his secretary would tell me how the problem could be resolved. He got up and walked out of the office. His secretary told me the judge wanted $1,000. I immediately got up and searched the building looking for Tan Senarong. I complained to Mr. Tschlamm, the president of the Tribune. He told me not to worry, that if I had done no wrong I had nothing to fear from his court. Within a week, Ten Senara (Tan Senarong’s sister) and Kep Noun from the CWCC visited my village and asked local parents to say I had sexually assaulted their children. I had lived in the village for eight years. No one in the village would complain against me. They were promised money if they would complain. Once or twice every month, families would come and tell me when the CWCC had been to our village. And the local police came to told me they had spoken to people in my village. The police told me that every one they had spoken to spoke well with me.
Three month after I refused to give Tan Senarong a thousand dollars, my house was surrounded by police. They were very polite, and apologized and told me they had a warrant to search my house. The warrant was issued by the same prosecutor that dealt with Knuchel who now alleged that my house was being operated as a brothel and that girls at my house were chained to their beds and forced to service Westerners. Very few Westerners ever came to my house, whereas many of the police had been to my house many times before in social visits.
My house was searched and the absurdity of the allegations was obvious. It angered everyone in the village as the girls and children at my house were from the village and their families were angry that they were being labeled as prostitutes. The police asked for everyone to come to the police station to be interrogated separately. At 2pm that day I took everyone to the police station where they all made statements. The chief of police told me everyone had made a statement and all said they were treated well at my place. He said the situation was finished, but that I should be careful as someone at the court didn’t like me. I went to the court and spoke to the President Mr. Tschlamm. He said the complaint had come from the CWCC. At that time we still did not realize that the CWCC was run by Ten Senara, the sister of Tan Senarong the investigating judge. Three months later Tan Senarong arrived at my house with six ‘prison guards’ from the Siem Reap prison. All were armed. He searched my place and took away 19 bullets and my passport. I was told by the district police that they had all refused to go and search my house since they knew this search to be illegal.
I offered to plead guilty to possession of 19 bullets. He said I could not, that I needed a lawyer. He said that I had to have a lawyer and it would cost me more than US $1000. For nine months he retained my passport and would not finish his investigation and hand the file to the prosecutor. The British Embassy had dealings with Tan Senarong to try to recover my passport. I spoke to the President of the court who told me he could do nothing until Tan Senarong completed his investigation and sent the file to the prosecutor. For the nine months that the file was open, the CWCC kept calling at my village to get someone to make an allegation against me that I had sexually assaulted children. Their pretext was Tan Senarong’s ongoing investigation. The court said they could not interfere with his investigation.
I was told by the people at the Siem Reap court that Tan Senarong had the protection of the Minister of Justice. After a number of complaints he was transferred from Siem Reap and my passport was returned. I complained to the court again against the CWCC. There were now fewer visits to my village, on average only one visit a month. In 2002, two of my staff had an argument with my wife. They wanted to stop work for a couple of months and then return. She told them they were needed and if they stopped, they would be replaced and could not return. They stopped work. Prior to this an old woman who had been the cook stole $93 and was dismissed. She was from the same village as the two who wanted to stop. Two months later the girls asked if they could return to work. My wife’s decision was that they could not. Their names were Nak and Pik. Soon a third girl Ping asked if she could leave. About a month later, people from their village came to my house and told me the three girls were telling the village that they would soon have $10,000 each as I had raped them. I went to the court and filed defamation cases against the three girls Nak, Pik, and Ping. Statements where taken from the new cook and from a girl named Srei Lyn. I had been treating the mother of Srei Lyn for the last eight month for tuberculosis. Lynn had worked for me for one and a half years when her mother was sent home from Dam Dek Hospital she was told she would die. I spent over $400 on Lynn’s mother and she recovered and was fit enough to join the other girls in court where she claimed I had raped her daughter.
Such disloyalty must been seen in the perspective that the $10,000 the CWCC was offering is 40 years salary in Cambodia. I also have evidence that those who refused to cooperate were threatened with life imprisonment for trafficking their children. Lynn who claimed I had raped her had previously made a statement at the court that I never touched any of the other girls and that Nak Pik and Ping were lying. As I am in prison, I have no idea how much force was used or promises made to make this family turn against me I hope we will find that at my appeal. Prior to my arrest, a prosecutor came to my house and said he had investigated the claims of the three girls and found them to be false and that the case was closed, but that the three were still being held at the CWCC. Ping asked if she could come back to work. My wife agreed and she asked if we could help her to get away from the CWCC. One of the children we helped to go to school was a 10 years old named Thouk Sam Ang. Because she lived 25 kilometers away she stayed at our house with my wife and me. Every weekend, we sent her home to spent time with her family.
When one morning after two years with us Thouk did not return from her weekend visit, I went to her house. Her mother said Ping had collected her and brought her to the CWCC. Her mother and I went to the judge Chalam. He said the CWCC could not kidnap people against the will of the parents and that we should go and collect her. We went to the CWCC and they said that they did not have her. Thouk later told us she could hear us outside, but they held her to stop her joining us. Kep Noun of the CWCC said Thouk had been sent home on a motor cycle and would now be at home as it was 2 pm. We returned to the house, but she was not there. We returned to the CWCC but they would not open the door. We went to the Deputy Governor. He wrote a letter for the chief of the police (copies available ) and instructed the police to return the child to the mother. A police car was dispatched to the CWCC, but they refused to open the door for the police. The police chief spoke to the CWCC on the phone and again they refused to co-operate. He told us that under Cambodian law he could not force entry to a house after dark. But if the child was not returned at first light tomorrow, he would break down the door.
Thouk’s mother and I were at the police station at 6.30 AM the next day. The police arrived at 7.30 AM with Thouk and we proceeded to the court where Thouk’s mother believed she laid a complaint of kidnapping against the CWCC. Neither of us read Khmer. Now I am not sure. The court has told the journalist that they have no such complaint against the CWCC. A journalist interviewed Thouk and said that the CWCC sat her in the room for four days, every hour asked her to say I had sex with her. She was told if she did not cooperate she would never see her family again and they would keep her there for ever.
She told the journalist that she knew that her mother and I would rescue her (Tapes available). (Editor. We have corroboration of all this from the journalist concerned). On the 23rd October, 2003 my wife I were summoned to the police station .As soon as I arrived, all the doors were locked with padlocks, and there were six police in the room. I was handcuffed, and my wife and I were taken to the court. My wife was offered immunity if she said I raped my staff. She had been told that we could both go home if she said she knew I slept with my staff. They asked her to sign a statement that I had raped them. She refused and was arrested for procuring . Later the charge was changed to assisting me to rape. Seven of my neighbor children were taken to the CWCC against their will and against the will of their parents, including Thouk Sam Ang. Wile they were held illegally at the CWCC, they were terrorized and traumatized. Two of the girls still have nightmares that the CWCC will come and get them again. They were held for 12 days against the law. They were told they would never see their families again. They were interrogated without their parents’ permission and without them being present. This is a human right breach and a breach of children’s rights. They were released when the families threatened to use force to recover their children.
I was told I could not get a fair trial in Siem Reap and at my trial no witness was cross examined and my lawyer offered no evidence, while seven witnesses were not allowed to testify. I was sentenced to 20 years in prison were I met Bart Lauwaert*, an Australian. I learned that the CWCC were his neighbor. They asked him to move out of his rented house as they needed it for a safe house. He told them he was happy there and would not move. Two months later he was arrested. He was convicted on eight counts of debauchery. Four of the witnesses he had never seen before. The mother of two of the other girls comes to visit at the prison. She has made a tape. She states that all the people involved in his accusations were promised US $10,000 each if they testified against him. As she had two daughters, she would get $20,000, which is eighty years salary of her husband and son in law combined. She was encouraged by the CWCC to buy on credit. When the case was over, she asked for her money. She was told by the CWCC to go and ask the prisoner. Her husband returned everything they had purchased, became an alcoholic and died soon after. The mother told me that since her false testimony her once loving family has collapsed. Her son in law had been threatened that if the girls did not cooperate he would be arrested for selling his sisters in law. He has since run away. When the father died, the mother begged the CWCC for the money to cremate him. They threw a dollar at her and told her to get out. She believes that her life will continue to be ruined unless she undoes the wrong she and her daughters have done. She would like to take a court action against the CWCC. But because she is poor no one is interested. The CWCC received over a half a million dollars in donations and grants last year. At this present time their staff are receiving education at the Australian Center of Education paid by AUSTAID.
With the money they collect from well-meaning NGOs and governments and their support in the Assembly, they can continue to perpetrate their scams on foreign nationals and continue to abuse Cambodian children with impunity. Why will no embassy ask the prime minister for an investigation? Where are the human rights organizations that are funded by donor money to protect Cambodian children? Every child who has been detained by the CWCC should be interviewed, every one who has testified against a foreigner in this cases should be interviewed and asked were you promised $10,000 if you complained and testified. Were you threatened or coerced into making a complaint? Children are being terrorized at the CWCC in a manner that would not be tolerated at Siem Reap maximum security prison. And as a result are traumatized.
All this is so that a few greedy women can get extra funding for their NGO which they claim was set up to help woman and children who are in crisis. The only crisis in their lives has been caused by the CWCC.
On the 2nd of August 2004, a statement signed by all ten girls in the cases of the two convicted Australians, Bart Lauwaert and Clint Betteridge, appeared in the Phnom Penh Press. It was an open letter to the Prime Minister Hun Sen. The letter appeared again on the 11th in the National Press. The basis of the letter is the ten girls and their mothers have asked the Prime Minister to intervene of behalf of the Australian Bart Lauwaert as he is innocent and that they the complainants had made false complaints and given false evidence in court (Editor. Clint Betteridge fled Cambodia but was imprisoned in Australia. The same girls were involved as the two men shared a house). They say they had been forced to do so by the CWCC and had been promised money if they did so. An original of the letter was sent to the human rights committee of Cambodia on the 28th July 2004 by TNT, courier service. A second original was sent directly to the office of the Prime Minister on 3rd August 2004 by EMS Khmer Express courier. Both letters were sent by the mother of two of the girls. On Sunday the 8th August 2004, Om Yientieng a senior advisor to Hun Sen, rang the prison in Siem Reap to speak to the Australian, Bart Lauwaert. As the adviser’s Khmer language is not good, he spoke to another prisoner close to the Australian. Om Yientieng had been the human rights adviser to the Prime Minister in the previous government.
Blake Alan Respini, an American teacher, was released from prison on June 11th 2004 by the Battambang court. He had been charged with two counts of debauchery. The two complainants said that they had been forced by the NGO to make the false allegations. The charges were dismissed. Between Sept 2003 and March 2004, many Westerners were arrested for sex crimes, and this was the period during which the NGOs must justify their existence to receive the following year’s donation. Arrested were the American, Charles Landis, finally released without charge and Australian David Ford, released without charge.
All arrests were at the request of NGOs such as the CWCC. With fourteen NGOs operating in Cambodia, competing for the $5.5 million the US government has allocated Cambodia for the purpose of arresting sex offenders, most will go to any length to manufacture a case. Each budget request is based on each arrest record. These NGOs with incomes ranging from half a million to a million find no problems getting help from police officers who earn only $20 a month.
I, Graham Cleghorn, now await an appeal court date.
Follow up news
We have also received this message from an intermediary.
“Your existence is saving lives. I have shown your articles to (name removed). It has given some hope. Being innocent in jail is hard. When everyone deserts you it is impossible. I'm sure you will find that to be the
cause of the Australian diplomat who took his own life in Bali. On the 28.8.04 I was given by (a friend) a printout from your web site. I believe it has stopped (name removed) from taking his own life, which he has tried once already. It has certainly helped me to get through - - - .
“Anyone who has been charged unjustly with a sex offence can tell you how lonely it is being vilified in the press, deserted by your friends and being slowly bled to death by your lawyers. (Name removed)’mother paid $10,000
and was given a receipt for $6,000. Then she paid £5,000 more and then $2,500. I have now heard on the grapevine
that the lawyer has asked his mother to pay $45,000. (Name removed)’mother doesn’t want his mother to pay - he thinks that if he is dead she is better off. If I was not here with him, he would be dead by now. The fact that Inquisition21 exists has given us hope. Like (another mother) (Name removed)’mother has mortgaged all they have and their relative’s properties as well. When he heard that the girls had all now told the truth, he thought he would be released. But then he found out that his lawyer is still trying to bleed his mother for more money. He has seen his lawyer four times, once to agree to take him once to court, and twice when he was at the prison on other cases. Please put all your efforts into getting this man released. Every witness against him has admitted they lied. He never physically touched any of them. Four of them he had never seen before the trial. Although he is thirty something, he is only a frightened little boy, who had never hurt anyone in his life.
Pleas to the government are not going to help. Pressure in the form of a travel warning to investors and travellers can produce an investigation of the CWCC. While the CWCC exists no one is safe.
The girls testify to Cleghorn’s innocence
We now have the statements from the girls alleged by the CWCC to have been assaulted by Graham Cleghorn
stating his complete innocence. But first his latest statement.
Statement by Graham Cleghorn,
Prior to my arrest I paid for the education of eight students, five girls and three boys. Upon my arrest the five girls were kidnapped by the Cambodian Women's Crisis Centre (CWCC). While they were detained by the CWCC, they were offered US $10,000 each if they would make a false claim of sexual assault against me. They refused, but were still detained against their will and the will of their parents. During this period of unlawful detention, they were threatened that unless they co-operated they would never see their parents again. The CWCC terrorized and traumatized these children in an effort to get them to make a false complaint against me. These heroic children held out for twelve days and even attempted an escape from the house they were detained unsuccessfully until their parents obtained their release with the threat of an attack on the building.
Upon their release they made voluntary statements with their village chiefs to prevent the CWCC from taking them again. Two of the girls still have nightmares of the CWCC coming for them again.
All five were present at my trial and wished to tell the court of their ordeal. The Judge ruled if they hadn't been assaulted, they had nothing to tell the court. Their testimony was prevented, as it would have shown the tactics used by the CWCC to obtain complaints against foreigners and discredited the testimony of the five adults who claimed they had been raped by me.
Graham Cleghorn
Siem Reap Prison
Further clarification
Since the above was written we have been in regular contact with Graham Cleghorn and have clarified the following points.
He tells us that when he was arrested, the CWCC took five children and five adult ex-staff members (his staff) to the CWCC home where they held the children unlawfully for twelve days, during which time they were threatened and offered money to falsely state that he had molested them. They refused. They were rescued after twelve days when their families threatened an attack on the CWCC. Despite this intimidation and abuse by the CWCC they not only refused to make false statements against him, but on their release they made statements in his defense. They were also present in court but were not allowed to testify. Despite this, the CWCC case was falling apart. So his five ex-staff agreed to reduce their ages by three years, so that each would appear to be under 18. One of them was four months pregnant to her husband. These five ex staff members have still not retracted their statements and are still with the CWCC.
Graham Cleghorn goes on to say that in the case of Bart Lauwaert, the CWCC produced ten witnesses and all ten have recanted and stated they were forced to make false allegations against him and forced to testify. In Rudolf Knuchel’s case, they went to the local school and offered US$10,000 to anyone who would make false allegations against him. They produced eight people but while they were recruiting the false witnesses a staff member taped the offers being made. It was that tape recording of witnesses being offered $10,000, and a motor cycle and a job with an NGO that destroyed the case against Knuchel.
The CWCC is not an international NGO. It is run entirely by Khmers, some with foreign citizenship. But unlike other NGOs it is purely Cambodian. But it receives foreign donations.
Graham Cleghorn is the only one out of the four foreigners (the fourth being Betterridge in prison in Australia) who has witnesses who have not yet recanted yet and the CWCC are keeping these under close supervision.
Editor Note. On the fact that the CWCC is run entirely by Khmers, some with foreign citizenship, it seems clear that they identified child rights as a lucrative industry.
Girls statements translated from Khmer into English
(Editor. We have the originals)
KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
NATION RELIGION KING
STATEMENT
My name is Thock Sam Ang, I am 12 years of age. I live in Brey Village, Canar Sondie Bantey Serei District, Siem Reap Province. I swear on oath to help the foreigner Mr. Graham that he has never touched my body. I want to tell on this paper, that it is true. Let my thumbprint be the evidence of my truth. Statement made in Brey Village Bantey Serei District.
I declare by my thumbprint that it is true.
Thock Sam Ang
Witnessed by Village Chief Brey Village, Bantey Serei
Chhom Vuoen
Date : 13.12.03
KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
NATION RELIGION KING
TRUE STATEMENT
My name is Lim Srei Mup, I am 14 years old. I live in Quien Village, Kok Jok District, Siem Reap Province. We both of us swear on oath that Mr. Graham from New Zealand has never touched our bodies in any way. We swear to this by this document. And put our thumbprint to state that this true.
Statement made in Quien Village on 10.12.03.
Printed by our thumbs:
Lim Srei Mup
Ve Sinun
Witnessed by Village Chief
Youm Youn
KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
NATION RELIGION KING
STATEMENT
My name is Pol Mai La, 15 years old. I live in Kok Wat Village, Jon Gal District. Odder Meanchey Province. And I am Mom Ko Sol, who lives at Kok Wat Village, Jon Gal District, Odder Meanchey Province. We both swear on oath the foreigner Mr. Graham, who lives in Pom Quien Village Kok Jak District, Siem Reap Province never touched on our bodies this we swear is true.
We both swear by this document and state this is true evidence by putting our right thumbprint.
Signed by our thumbs:
Pol Mai La
Mom Ko Sol
Witnessed by the Village Chief of Kok Wat Village
Pan Pon
13.12.03
A child being sexually abused is news. The fact that you didn’t sexually abuse them is no news
Quotation from a reporter in The Cambodia Daily.
(This report is from inside Cambodia, and the correspondent’s name is being withheld for reasons of security.)
All the perpetrators in the scam involving the innocent men convicted in Cambodia appear to be from the political party of Funcinpec, the Royalists. Let us begin with the then, Minister of Justice, Niev Satong, an Australian passport holder, and the Minister of Woman’s Affairs, Mu Suchua, an American passport holder. These two ministers gave protection to the listed head of the Cambodian Woman Crisis Center (CWCC) Chanthal Ong. The real head of CWCC is Mu Suchua, although one may have trouble proving it, but she is the one who obtains and directs most of the American donations to the CWCC, and through them to the police they control.
Chanthal Ong and her husband were in Site 2 Refugee Camp on the border with Thailand, in the late 1980s, where he was the director of Rithyson Camp. He controlled every lucrative position. Next in line is Ten Senara, the founder of the Siem Reap branch of the CWCC. It was opened when her brother, Tan Senarong, was transferred to Siem Reap as the only Funcinpec Judge. He was appointed to Siem Reap by the Minister of Justice Niev Satong. This is the judge accused of corruption by Graham Cleghorn who claims that he initially tried to extort money from him, and, when he failed, used the CWCC to arrest him for sex crimes. So we have a judge accused of corruption and his sister running a child rights organization that has demonstrated corruption with several other men, mainly through extortion, and the kidnapping and blackmail of girls.
Local judges and police officers were powerless in the face of the arrival of Tan Senarong and had to bend to the pressure of the new minister or face a sideways shift. The police who are not under the justice ministry resisted the pressure, until directed by the Siem Reap Governor, Chap Nhyalivuth, who just happens to be the half brother of Prince Ranahridh, the Funsinpec President. He has the same mother, but different father. The Prince’s father is the King. The Governor’s father is a commoner. The Governor is also a French passport holder. Prior to being Governor he was a taxi driver in Paris. It seems that none of these foreign passport holders have their homes, hearts or bank accounts in Cambodia.
Funcinpec is known as the Royalist party. Prior to the Khmer Rouge their motto was. ‘Get power, get money and get out’. It’s said that their new motto is ‘Go back, get more and get out again’.
Graham Cleghorn’s arrest was ordered by the governor Chap Nhyalivuth, the Paris taxi driver. Probably on the orders of the American woman, Mu Suchua. It was accompanied by profuse apologies from the police and caused one police officer to break down and cry. As there is only one appeal court, the appeal judges cannot be transferred anywhere and do their best to dispense justice. One commentator said that any justice resulting in the release of innocent men ‘is usually followed by screams of “corruption” from Mu Suchua’. In the last election Hun Sen’s party, the CPP won 60%, but thanks to a US/UN ruling they needed 66% to rule alone. What they do have, however, is some justice back in the hands of a party that is loyal to Cambodia not to foreign interests and personal wealth.
The Cambodian Women Crisis Center (CWCC) is now headless with the sacking of both Niev Satong and Mu Suchua, so the situation in Cambodia should improve. We have been asked not to judge Cambodia by the action of the CWCC, as they are a minority. The Cambodia Daily, friend of Mu Suchua is not interested in the truth about the corrupt activities of the police and the CWCC. A reporter told our correspondent: “A child being sexually abused is news. The fact that you didn’t sexually abuse them is no news.” He went on to add that this was the view of most of the media. The best example is that despite the fact that all ten girls who accused Bart Lauwaert have signed a letter asking the Prime Minister to help him and admitting they were forced to lie by the CWCC, he has now started his third year in jail, and his life is more in danger since the deceptions have been exposed. He has no-one to fight for him as the Australian government remains extraordinarily reluctant to move to free him. There may be good reasons for that which we will come to.
Graham Cleghorn still has his wife and over a hundred Khmers from his village and many of his ex staff that come to the prison to feed him, but Bart has no one. Now that the ten girls have retracted we await to see if the Australian authorities will finally move to support Bart, but we must add that New Zealand has been disgraceful in its disinterest in Graham Cleghorn. Another Peter Ellis? Two of the girls who held out for 12 days against the CWCC have been to visit Graham. They told him that they still wake up at night crying and fearing that the CWCC will come for them again. They are amongst the many children abused the CWCC.
Ten girls altogether were roped into the Lauwaert/Betteridge cases. Cambodia is the example of what happens
when women and child rights groups are given political and police powers. They use them for terror and extortion, and do not think that the activities such organizations as the NSPCC in the UK are any different – only in the degree of the powers they yield.
Some questions.
Why has the Cambodian government not stopped Mu Suchua? A possible answer - she is an American citizen and a darling of Republican Party’s ‘faith-based’ activities abroad.
Why did the Australian Government betray the Australians Lauwaert and Betteridge? Is one answer Niev Satong, the Australian passport holder, ex Minister of Justice.
How much money has the Australian Government given to the Cambodian justice department via Niev Satong? Who paid for the repainting of the Siem Reap court during the Lauwaert/Betteridge cases. Why did Australia pay for two lawyers to act for the Cambodian government against him, while refusing him legal aid? Why did they pass special legislation to extradite him back to Cambodia?
Who is paying for the CWCC to attend the Australian Centre for Education? Is it from the money given by AustrAid? Why did an Australian ex diplomat commit suicide in a Bali prison instead of waiting for his appeal? Why did the Australian federal police pay children twice the average adult wage in the pedophile case against the Australian Ambassador prior to them giving evidence?
Is it out of embarrassment that the Australian government accepts dubious evidence against their own citizens?
Now the Cambodian government? How many police officers are now more loyal to the CWCC than to the director of police and what do you intend to do about it? Poor police are loyal to the one who pays.
Why is an Australian still in jail when all evidence has been recanted?
Has an investigation been initiated into the activities of the CWCC? And the two ex ministers, who protected them while they committed their crimes? Now that Niev Satong is gone who is protecting Tan Senarong, the corrupt investigating judge?
Why did Tan Senarong use prison guards for protection when he executed an illegal search Cleghorn’s house? One answer may be that the military police, the criminal police, and the district, and provincial police refused to accompany him. There are a lot of honest policemen in Cambodia. Even poor policemen can be honest and have resisted being corrupted by the CWCC.
The NZ media respond, but where is Amnesty?
This news is just coming in and will be summarized here shortly.
First one.
NEWS ITEM - TV3 EVENING NEWS, SATURDAY 27 November
2004
News reader: Graham Cleghorn is serving a 20-year sentence. In a report for tomorrow's Herald on Sunday he claims from jail that the girls who testified against him were bribed and coerced to make false
allegations. Tony Field reports:
Tony Field [TF]: Cleghorn is serving a 20 year sentence for child sex crimes he says he didn't commit. He claims the girls who testified against him were bribed and coerced by a Non Governmental Organisation called the Cambodian Women's Crisis Centre.
Graham Cleghorn [GC] (shots of Cambodian street scene, Cleghorn in both Western & Eastern clothes): The CWCC know that anybody charged with a sex offence - everybody deserts them. Their friends walk off and leave them.
TF: Cleghorn and his supporters say the CWCC's been offering girls $10,000 each to win convictions against foreign men.
GC: $10,000 is 40 year's salary. How can - that's the equivalent of saying to somebody in New Zealand, would they sell you out for five million. And it's pretty hard not to accept.
TF: But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs says it has no reason to doubt the convictions. Nor does child abuse campaigner Denise Ritchie who was briefed by staff at New Zealand's Bangkok Embassy the week Cleghorn was convicted in February.
Denise Ritchie: The Ambassador did tell me that he had sent one of the Embassy staff over to monitor the trial. One would expect that, if there was any perception of a miscarriage of justice, the New Zealand Embassy would be one of the first people to be jumping up and down.
TF: Cleghorn says since his conviction several girls have come
forward saying the CWCC held them against their will and tried to force them to testify.
GC: They held them in rooms, and they told them they would never see their mothers again if they didn't say that I'd sexually assaulted them.
TF: The organisation denies offering money to anyone to testify. The case will be appealed next month. British Embassy staff have been visiting Cleghorn in prison to check on his condition. His family are worried that his health's deteriorating. His daughter Heidi says her father's been suffering from chest pains, but prison authorities are
ignoring his requests for medical help. Tony Field, Three News.
(Full story can be reached from headline 'Please help Graham Cleghorn!' on index page below)
Is Amnesty infected?
When Graham Cleghorn was at one of his lowest points in prison in Siem Reap, Cambodia, he smuggled a letter out for a friend to send to Amnesty International. To ensure that they were aware of it, we later published it here. Amnesty International ignored him and us. As our contact with Graham Cleghorn was cut of by the authorities in Cambodia, he is not yet aware that they have ignored him.
After months of campaigning to get the New Zealand authorities and media to react to the evidence that we had gathered about how this man was setup and the corruption involved in his prosecution, we finally managed to get him mentioned on a New Zealand TV news program in late November 2004. During that broadcast, Ms Denise Ritchie, a member of Ecpat, the acronym for the East Asian and Pacific Regional Consultation Against the Commercial Exploitation of Children, appeared and spoke against his innocence. See above. In 2001, Denise Ritchie suggested that Father's Day in New Zealand be ‘declared a national day of shame’.
Another active member of Ecpat is Miriam Saphira of the Christchurch Civic Crèche case fame. Amnesty NZ appears to be deeply influenced by these women and by Ecpat. Ecpat is very involved in SE Asia, and possibly connected with Amnesty there.
If Amnesty, or a person close to them, has attacked Graham Cleghorn after he appealed to them for help, we would like to know about it. Information please to us through Contact in menu on left.
Graham Cleghorn's appeal
Graham Cleghorn's appeal held on Monday 18 July at 8.00am was postponed again.
It was postponed again, due to his lawyer not having had time to read the brief properly at such short notice. Graham looked well and in good spirits and said he was being treated well in prison. The judge did not spend much time on the case as it was being suspended, but he did tell the clerk there were discrepencies in the girl's family books regarding their ages which displeased him. This has been central to the case for his defence - however the appeal simply never takes place, as this man is milked dry.
New Zealand responds to plight of Cleghorn
(This came after another farcical appeal held in secret at which the court refused again to hear from his witnesses)
It has taken us years, but the New Zealand government has finally responded to the plight of Graham Cleghorn locked up in Cambodia. It is now more than time for Australians also to wake up and help their own two innocent citizens.
Over the years, friends had brought the Cambodian girls whom he was supposed to have abused hundreds of kilometres from their village to Phnom Penh in the hope that officials and the court would hear their testimony that they had been kidnapped and coerced into making false allegations in return for compensation offered by the ‘women’s rights’ organization the CWCC. The girls sent us letters and their photographs which were published here and on a special web site set up for them at Ectopia. They wrote to the Prime Minister of Cambodia. They made a protest banner. New Zealander, Graham Cleghorn, was one of three men that the CWCC had coerced them into making allegations against. The other two were Australians Bart Lauwaert, still in prison with Cleghorn, and Clint Betterridge who, after managing to escape from Cambodia, was disgracefully locked up in prison in Australia, where he and his friends have been fighting extradition back to Cambodia. Australia even passed special legislation to allow him to be sent back. We supplied all the evidence of the corruption used against the two Australian men to the Australian government. They ignored it all and kept Clint in prison and did nothing for Bart.
Now they have a problem. The New Zealand government has finally accepted the injustice and sent two diplomats to negotiate for Graham to Cambodia. Of great importance is that they and the NZ media have finally acknowledged the girls’ retractions and the activities of the (ironically funded by the Australians) CWCC, which sets up foreign men in exchange for foreign donations.
On February 18 2006, Graham’s story became the lead in Wellington’s Dominion Post and was lead also on national radio.
Clint's story is HERE.
Bart's story is HERE.
Here is the Dominion Post story:
Girls take back rape allegations
18 February 2006
By MATTHEW TORBIT
New Zealand diplomats have intervened in the case of a Kiwi man serving 20 years in a Cambodian prison on sex charges ? after the teenage complainants all retracted their evidence against him.?
Graham Cleghorn, 55, a former aid worker, was jailed in February 2004 and is being held in Phnom Penh's Prey Sar prison.
The New Zealand Government had already raised concerns at the handling of Cleghorn's trial ? which took just nine hours.
He was refused a translator, and denied the right to call his own witnesses and cross-examine prosecution witnesses.
Now diplomats have again stepped in after Cleghorn's appeal was conducted without his knowledge.
The unsuccessful appeal, secretly held last month in Siam Reap, did not allow Cleghorn to present written statements from all five women he was convicted of raping that state the sex crimes did not happen.
Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry spokeswoman Helen Tunnah said the Government had been monitoring Cleghorn's situation since he was jailed, but decided to act after news of the appeal dismissal emerged.
The New Zealand ambassador in Bangkok, Peter Rider, had met a representative at Cambodia's embassy this week to outline this country's "grave" concerns about Cleghorn's appeal being heard in his absence.
"The ambassador pointed out neither Cleghorn, his lawyer or New Zealand officials had been told the appeal was to be heard and asked for an explanation as to how this came about.
"It was emphasised that this had denied Mr Cleghorn the opportunity to present a case, which breached his right to a fair hearing."
Ms Tunnah said embassy staff were awaiting a response from Cambodian officials.
Cleghorn's two daughters have hired prominent Wellington lawyer Greg King, who said he was disgusted at the legal processes surrounding the case.
He described the appeal dismissal as a "breach of fundamental natural justice in every sense".
Cleghorn had pinned all of his hopes for freedom on the appeal. "And for that now to be dismissed without him knowing, without him being present, without him being represented, is abhorrent."
Mr King said his client was a victim of a non-government organisation, the Cambodian Women's Crisis Centre, which was seeking millions of dollars of foreign funding that had been poured into Southeast Asia to stop child prostitution with Western men.
"Organisations have popped up to get their hands on this funding, and the way to do this is to catch people involved in the illicit sex trade, which Graham's been caught up in."
An excerpt from one of the five teens' statements says: "I swear on oath to help the foreigner Mr. Graham that he has never touched my body."
In a statement published on the Internet soon after his conviction, Cleghorn said he was framed by corrupt officials, including Siam Reap District Court judge Ten Senarong who wanted land he owned near the ancient temple Angkor Wat.
When he refused, Judge Senarong's sister Tan Senara, who ran the local office of the crisis centre, began approaching girls in his village offering them US$10,000 each to testify that he had molested them.
In October 2003 he was arrested and charged with five counts of rape, as well as unlawful possession of a weapon.
About the same time, an Australian and Swiss national were imprisoned in similar circumstances.
Bronwyn Sloan, a Cambodian-based Australian, said she visited Cleghorn in prison before he found out the appeal had been thrown out.
"He was holding it together but he does have health problems," she said. "But I imagine he will now be totally devastated."
Ms Sloan said Cleghorn arrived in Cambodia in the late 1980s and worked as an aid worker in Cambodia's northern border camps. He formerly lived in Petone.
She said Cleghorn's Cambodian wife Der and their six-year-old child were distraught at his treatment.
Search Google News for other Graham stories.
* See the separate stories about Bart Lauwaert and Clint Betteridge, all linked to the CWCC in menu bottom of page.
Country by country
Clint Betterridge - stop this extradition! It's over.
The Peter Ellis story
The Shieldfield travesty
The Saskatoon story
The McMartin and other US stories
Act of infamy – the Nora Wall story
Bart Lauwaert tells his own story
Australia’s criminal involvement in Cambodia
Graham Cleghorn writes from Cambodian prisons
The setting up of Rudolf Knuchel
The Pitcairn sex trial – the cast and the story
 |
|
|
