Despite my anguish at the use of Sophie’s diary, it was produced as evidence by both sides. Although his defence team used what suited them, at other times Weatherston rubbished Sophie’s words. But why would Sophie, believing no one would ever see her words, lie to herself when writing in her diary? Here is how one exchange was reported by The Press:
Weatherston was challenged about variations between his account of some events compared with those of others, including Elliott. Bates read from Elliott’s diary where she claimed Weatherston had assaulted her in his flat on 27 December 2007.
‘Lord, I hardly know where to start. Clayton assaulted me. When I went to leave he went absolutely psycho (no exaggeration at all, I assure you). He told me I’m a f … ing horrible person, everyone hates me, I’m f … ing ugly, he has never liked me etc, while pinning me down with his entire body on his bed.’
Elliott wrote that Weatherston had put his forearm across her throat and put his hand over her mouth to stop people from hearing her yelling at him to get off her.
‘I confess I was very scared and panicky. I’ve never had a guy use his weight against me like that … I knew he was furious and extremely unreasonable.’
Weatherston agreed they had ended up on the bed, but Elliott’s account of the incident was embellished and a fantasy. ‘It’s Pride and Prejudice — you’ve seen it — she’s Mrs Bennet and I’m Mr Darcy. It’s Mills and Boon. This whole dramatic stuff didn’t occur,’ he said. ‘And clearly I’m not Sophie’s biggest fan because of the relationship, and in my view she is an attempted murderer or [had committed] an attempted assault.’
Elliott had been portrayed in a different light compared with his own experiences.
‘That’s just the way it is. Clearly, in this position that I am in, society moves forward, but I was at that point a little bit frustrated indeed,’ he said.
Weatherston agreed he had told a psychologist that he was frustrated Elliott had had a trust set up in her name at Otago University after her death.
‘That was my frustration at the contrived legacy and misrepresentation of her character,’ he said.
This is typical of Weatherston’s tactics and to my mind it was he who was misrepresenting Sophie’s character. Unfortunately, in employing this kind of defence he left Sophie totally unable to defend her own reputation. The overall impression left was of a manipulative woman who dominated him, virtually enslaving him. I know differently because of what Sophie said to me and what she wrote in her diary. This contrasts dramatically with Weatherston’s recount.
I want to give my version of how I saw Sophie, along with the memories of her father and two brothers. Teachers, academics and friends have also contributed their treasured memories of Sophie. Because of the way the courts operate, it is very difficult to challenge what is said by the defendant and no opportunity to do so exists when defence counsel sums up. Almost anything can be said about a dead person and it can go unchallenged. This is my only opportunity to produce another side: Sophie’s side.
Sophie — The Student
Christine Leighton, former principal at St Hilda’s Collegiate School, speaking at Sophie’s funeral service:
When I arrived [as principal] Sophie was in Year 9. She was a girl of amazing talent and with many special qualities, evident even from a young age. I particularly remember Sophie as a girl with twinkling eyes. She was one of those little, particularly beautiful and neat students. Sophie looked simply lovely in her blue school uniform and wore it with pride. To me she was the quintessential St Hilda’s girl who unquestionably would achieve academically. In Year 13, Sophie took two papers in stage one economics at the University of Otago. This is enough of an achievement for a school girl but in both papers Sophie achieved A grades.
Sophie didn’t focus on academic excellence at the expense of becoming a well-rounded student. She took advantage of all the opportunities available to her at school. Sophie particularly enjoyed drama and was a keen participant in the Shakespeare Festival both as an actor and producer. She won the best actress award in 2003. Her dramatic talents also saw her involved in Theatre Sports and school productions.
As a debater, Sophie’s quick wit, general knowledge and skill with language made her a skilled orator. But not only could Sophie debate, dance and act, she also sang and made a great contribution to St Hilda’s Madrigal Choir. She balanced all this activity by playing a range of sports, particularly tennis, netball, softball and badminton. Sophie certainly made the most of what was on offer and, typical of her, she not only took but she gave. She gave in the form of being a school librarian, serving on the chapel committee, Amnesty International and school canteen. Everything Sophie did, she did with cheerful enthusiasm and vigour.
When I wrote Sophie’s leaver’s profile comments in December 2003 I recorded that Sophie had an enquiring mind and was able to fluently express well-thought-out opinions. I also said she was a girl who was ahead of herself academically, a girl who was independent, a mature thinker, unafraid of expressing her opinions in class. In my final paragraph I wrote, ‘Sophie’s energy is boundless. Her determination to do well is very strong as is her outstanding work ethic. Her independence of thought marks her maturity. She is extremely well groomed, a poised and elegant young woman. We wish her every success in achieving the goals she will set for herself at a tertiary level.’ And of course Sophie did just that and her tragic death is all the more tragic because of that amazing untapped potential.
Melissa Bell, Sophie’s former teacher and the new principal of St Hilda’s, remembers Sophie as an eager young student and was profoundly dismayed at the way she was maligned during Weatherston’s trial. She and her staff found the denigration of my daughter so at odds with what they are trying to achieve in the education and social development of young women:
Sophie’s death was the worst thing I have had to confront in education. It wasn’t just about the funeral service held at the school or the months that followed. It’s the fact that this awful tragedy doesn’t go away. For the teachers who knew and taught Sophie, the intense feelings of despair and the incredible sadness are just the same today, even though we are three years on. If anything we are more confused now than we were when she died.
Staff at the school followed the High Court proceedings very carefully. One of the outcomes of that trial was the absolute outrage at the things that were said about Sophie. Staff were appalled that such things could be raised about anyone, let alone a delightful student we had come to admire.
One thing I felt most strongly about was how, in the court case, attributes and qualities in Sophie that we saw as real strengths were twisted to have negative connotations. For example, Sophie was an incredibly determined student. As principal of a girls’ secondary school, I see determination as one of the key attributes to be developed in young women. In the court case this was twisted into an ambition seen as not feminine, or inappropriate for a young woman, and more of a stubbornness that was kind of destructive. Whereas all we saw in Sophie was determination, a love of learning, a thirst for knowledge and a desire to get involved. We didn’t like what we knew of Sophie being twisted into something it wasn’t.
I remember Sophie in my maths class. I said to the girls, you can sit wherever you want. Sophie went straight to the front centre — the desk no one wants. Everyone wants to sit at the back or sides. My memory of Sophie that year was, whenever a question was asked, firing her hand up, wanting to give the answer — wanting to think and wanting to be challenged.
I remember her as a girl who didn’t really care what others thought of her. At Sophie’s funeral one of her friends reminisced about how Sophie turned up on a mufti day with a Princess Leia hairstyle — she was a devoted Star Wars fan. That was a bit ‘out there’ for the school, but Sophie didn’t care. She was prepared to put that aside. The opinions of her friends mattered but she wasn’t the kind who followed a code of behaviour because it was expected. She was strong in herself and from a very early ag
e was aware of who she was. Some teachers found she was really determined in class and could dig herself into a bit of a hole because she was prepared to fight for herself and fight her own battles. I see that as an admirable quality. It’s strange because we have this new curriculum for New Zealand schools that talks about resilience. And I think Sophie was one of the most resilient young women I have ever met. She knew where she was going and appreciated the help she got but was clear about who she wanted to be and what she wanted to get out of any situation. If a teacher wasn’t delivering or wasn’t extending Sophie, I’m sure she would have had the confidence to say I need more. She was that kind of girl.
Sophie wasn’t arrogant. What you saw was what you got. There was a sense that she wasn’t the kind of girl to have conversations behind the backs of others. If she had something to say she said it to you. In a way she was more like some of the boys I have taught. Often with girls there is a lot of waste that goes into conversations that don’t achieve much. Everything Sophie did had a purpose. If she was to complain about something it was done in a way that had an outcome. I think that’s a fantastic quality. She would confront people if she was unhappy but things got dealt with. From my perspective it wasn’t about power as had perhaps been implied at the trial. It would really be about moving forward to solve problems. She had a great sense of justice. If she thought others had been treated inappropriately she would advocate for them.
One key memory of Sophie was as a performer. When she was on the stage she had this real glint in her eye. There could be a hundred people on the stage but everyone would be watching Sophie. You were just drawn to her. We still have a large photograph hanging in the school foyer taken during a stage challenge production. In it Sophie is wearing a stunning red dress. That is how Sophie is remembered by staff at St Hilda’s.
As principal of a girls’ school I feel really strongly that we almost expect women to behave in a different way to men. Sophie was seen by the defence as overly ambitious. If she had been a man she would have been described as determined and motivated, so when those negative implications were raised by the defence I realised just how horrific this court case was on our current students. They look at photos of Sophie in her St Hilda’s uniform and realise it could be them. Then they hear messages that she was too ambitious and they think, Am I going to be safer if I lower my expectations? All that talking and twisting of the truth is incredibly negative for our current students and other young women in New Zealand.
There’s almost an implicit suggestion that it was all right for Clayton Weatherston to be angry and throw tantrums, but not okay for Sophie to stand her ground. That’s the implication made and that’s a really negative message.
One of the things about Sophie I always felt was a real strength was her creativity. Sophie loved the challenge of photography and much of the skill she developed can be attributed to John Huggett, a long-serving and senior member of staff at St Hilda’s:
From a teacher’s point of view you wouldn’t want more from a student. Sophie was a super kid with so much vivacity. A young woman who was always on the go. And she had so many talents, one of which was creativity. This was never more evidenced than when I taught her photography in Year 12. What a talent.
Photography was then a Sixth Form Certificate subject and I found that many students, though capable and enthusiastic, took a rather staid approach to the subject. Sophie managed to go way beyond that. She was one of those people who didn’t accept things at face value. I think her greatest strength, beyond understanding the technical aspects of photography, was an ability to analyse and explain complex ideas clearly.
An even more enduring memory I have of Sophie was in Year 13 when I taught her History of Art. She was outstanding. In that class were many able and motivated students who produced thoroughly researched quality work. But Sophie had more. She was a lateral thinker, always looking for other perspectives. In that final year the students studied mainly Italian Renaissance art, looking at the historical context of art and artists. In this subject Sophie stood out because she had a talent for writing critically with lucid explanations of what were relatively complicated concepts. St Hilda’s is a school of high achievers so to be awarded an academic prize is no mean feat. It certainly came as no surprise to me that, apart from being joint proxime accessit, Sophie was awarded the Amanda McKeown Memorial Prize for History of Art.
Sophie — The Academic
I couldn’t imagine a mother more proud of a daughter’s achievements at university than I was for Sophie. I knew she was bright but had no idea just how able she was especially at putting together sound arguments. And to think that despite the ups and downs of her relationship with Weatherston and working part-time to get through university she still achieved an A+ for all four papers in that final year as well as a first-class honours degree.
Peter Lambert is a professor of economics at the University of Oregon in the United States. His specialty subject is the economics of inequality and in February 2007 he accepted an invitation from the university to come to Dunedin and teach an upper-level seminar on microeconomics. Sophie was one of Peter’s four students. Sophie’s true talent and her many achievements are encapsulated in a paper she wrote for that seminar. When Peter returned from Oregon to speak at Sophie’s memorial service, this is what he had to say:
Sophie Elliott somehow managed to remain quite unobtrusive even in such a small class but one thing I did remember was her smile. When I returned to Oregon I received a paper from Sophie entitled ‘Why measure inequality? A discussion of the concept of equality’. It was easily the best essay on inequality that I have ever read and this has been my research area for 30 years. I gave Sophie the highest grade I could, an A+. In Sophie’s paper, there are many questions to ponder. Should a policy be about the people who deserve to be treated equally rather than those who are treated equally? How should we treat benevolence in society? Do we wish to make people in society equal in terms of the things that do generate welfare, or in terms of the things that should generate welfare?
She examined the contrasting viewpoints and analyses of a dozen of the main thinkers, philosophers and economists who are today concerned with equity as a fundamental value in society. She defined equity, explained its links with equality (which people like me try to measure, but it is not the same thing), and skilfully interplayed the thoughts of the main actors. In doing so, she indicated at many points, gently but firmly, what she herself believed. I found this stunningly to the point, thoughtful and mature.
In the days after the tragedy, I told two key researchers on inequality measurement about Sophie and her term paper. Professor Jean-Yves Duclos, editor of the international Journal of Economic Inequality, wrote back to me in these terms: ‘It is a remarkable piece of research for such a young person. It is very perceptive, extremely well written, and very enjoyable to read. In just a few paragraphs, the paper is able to strike right to the core of welfare economics and to grasp many of its complex philosophical and ethical issues. Elliott certainly had a beautiful mind. One can sense that she was also kind-hearted.’
Sophie’s essay went on to be published after her death in Oxonomics, the Oxford University Economic Studies Compendium. Professor Sir Tony Atkinson, of Nuffield College, Oxford, respected worldwide as the ‘father’ of inequality analysis, also wrote to me, as follows: ‘Sophie’s paper is indeed outstanding for a term paper. I began reading it on the screen and then decided to print it out, as I would like to keep a copy. It is a mature and concise summary of a difficult literature.’
So it wasn’t just me who found there was something quite extraordinary about Sophie Elliott. I had the sense that I was engaging with a brilliant, kind and personable young professional on the brink of an exceptional career. She had popped up into my rather drab academic world with a luminous presence and a limitless future. Sophie’s death evoked profound emotions in me and I don’t suppose many of us saw the magic in her during her life, least of all her
self. I believe Sophie was an extraordinary young woman, so gifted, so talented and so generous. For someone as renowned as Professor Sir Tony Atkinson to want to print off a student’s essay to keep says it all.
Those recollections are from people who knew Sophie as a student. My memories of Sophie are obviously far more personal.
Sophie — The Daughter/Sister
People might think that the hardest parts of writing Sophie’s Legacy were recalling the shocking events I witnessed on 9 January 2008, or those very dark days in the months following Sophie’s death. Those recollections were difficult, but as I write about my memories of a special daughter my heart weighs very heavily indeed because, while Sophie was in most respects just an ordinary girl, she had a vivacity about her that I miss tremendously. That coupled with the enormous potential people talk about makes the loss even harder to bear. But above all it was the relationship Sophie and I had that makes her death all the sadder. I can’t speak of other mother/daughter relationships, but I think what we had was special. Despite the age gap (I had Sophie when I was almost 40), we were always close. She was first and foremost my daughter but she was also a friend and confidante.
I regarded Sophie as near perfect, but of course that’s through a mother’s eyes. She was always tidy and well groomed with immaculate hair. While she didn’t wear a lot of make-up, what she did use offset her natural beauty. And she had the most amazing nails, absolutely beautiful. But it was her hair she was most proud of. I’m sure the hair product industry has taken a nosedive in the last three years.
Sophie’s Legacy Page 9