I blogged a few days ago on the claims by the widow of Awanui Black that he was a paedophile.
I said that one shouldn’t rush to judgement as there were no details, no complainants and the reference to organised child-adult sex rings seemed over the top.
In an exclusive interview with the NZ Herald, we learnt a bit more, including:
This goes deep and wide, in terms of the paedophile ring, to the highest heights you can imagine. These people aren’t just labourers and workers at fast food restaurants. These people are suits and people in power.”
Also she alleged:
Now, she believed he had used their marriage as a mask for his “private life” – one that included affairs with consenting adults, abuse against children and large amounts of alcohol.
“He did admit to me that he thought he was rangatira and he thought he was entitled to have women wherever he slept for the night. That might have rolled a few hundred years ago but it’s not what I signed up for.
“He was never ever faithful. Prostitutes, orgies, group sex – all of it.”
Now prostitutes, orgies and group sex (if true) are not illegal. They certainly would make your partner hate you, but they don’t make you a paedophile.
And there were children, she said. The youngest victim to have emerged was someone who had said they were aged 8 when sexually abused by Awanui Black.
Zhou Black said the couple separated in 2012, during which time he admitted affairs and using pre-teen pornography. There was a reconciliation a year later but the time away gave Zhou Black a voice she felt she never had and the reunion never worked.
In 2014, they separated again and stayed apart.
And they were seperated.
“We don’t know where the cover up will begin. There are compromised police here in Tauranga that are part of that ring. I know of one.”
She would also not name a number of suspected victims, again because it could jeopardise the police inquiry.
The police inquiry is key. What is alleged is serious criminal behaviour by her ex husband, and many others. So it is good that the Police have investigated.
Which brings me to this column by Martin van Beynen who informs us of something I had not seen before:
By Wednesday, the police had interviewed Black and issued a release with the following sentence:
“Based on the information available to us at this time, no victims have come forward to Police and no victims have been identified.”
That seems to suggest Black has been unable to produce any hard evidence for the police to investigate. Not even a single name.
This should be ringing big alarm bells.
It may be that in time she will be vindicated and a procession of victims will come forward with reliable accounts.
It is possible. But MVB makes a useful point:
Let’s assume for a minute that what Black alleges is true. That her husband was in fact part of an organised group that recruited and groomed children for the members’ sexual gratification.
By broadcasting her allegations to the world on Facebook, Black gave the perpetrators an invaluable warning. They had a useful head start before the police started looking for evidence. Get rid of the computers, written material, cellphones etc. Get out of the country.
If the organised abuse has been going on for most her adult life, why on earth did Black wait until her husband died?
Surely the scores of children being abused for years deserved better. If she wanted to protect children and expose the perpetrators of the abuse she alleged in the post, she chose exactly the wrong way to do it.
She should have gone to the Police, not to Facebook.