Editorial: Priority conscience, not cash

Teina Pora.

I'm all for anything that will save children from being abused or, worse, killed at the hands of those who are meant to be cuddling them.

However, the police proposal to pay people who report child abusers bothers me on a number of levels.

Firstly, can people who report abuse for money be relied on to tell the truth?

Any decent person who knew a child was being abused would report it straight away, not for the sake of a reward but for the sake of the child.

Secondly, we all know some people will do anything for money.

Child, Youth and Family has enough on its plate without following up bogus complaints.

Every complaint will have to be thoroughly examined, otherwise what's the point of it?

Thirdly - and this is the one that worries me the most - is Teina Pora.

Let's not forget that one of the Crown's key witnesses was Mr Pora's aunt, Terry McLaughlin, who testified against him and was paid $5000.

This was an aunt who had brought him up. The sum of $5000 was a lot of money back then and still is.

For Mrs McLaughlin, it was most likely a fortune. It's been reported that a minimum of three witnesses were paid a total of $15,000 to testify against Mr Pora, although police have refused to give any information on who they were.

As we all know now, Mr Pora didn't murder Susan Burdett and sadly money, along with his foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, played a large part in his "confession".

When police told him there was a $20,000 reward for assistance in capturing Ms Burdett's murderer, Mr Pora claimed to know things he didn't and from there it was all downhill.

Conscience, not cash, should drive people to stop child abusers.