C v Reinecker - [2009] QDC 96

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: C v Reinecker [2009] QDC 96
PARTIES: C v TYRONE GORDON REINECKER
FILE NO/S: D4/2008
DIVISION: Civil
PROCEEDING: Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING
COURT: District Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON: 3 April 2009 (ex tempore)
DELIVERED AT: Rockhampton
HEARING DATE: 3 April 2009
JUDGE: Dearden DCJ
ORDER: That the respondent TYRONE GORDON
REINECKER pay the applicant C the sum of $48,
000.00.
CATCHWORDS: APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – assault occasioning bodily harm – indecent assault – injuries including functional impairments - adverse impacts
LEGISLATION: Criminal Offence Victims Act (Qld) 1995 ss 1A, 20, 22
(4), 24, 25, 26
CASES: R v Ward; ex parte Dooley [2001] 2 Qd R 436
Riddle v Coffey [2002] 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA
337
Wren v Gaulai [2008] QCA 148
R v Attwell; ex parte Jullie [2002] 2 Qd R 367
COUNSEL: Mr B Begg for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

[1] HIS HONOUR: This is the criminal compensation decision in the matter of C, applicant, and Tyrone Gordon Reinecker, respondent. It's number D4 of 2008 at the Rockhampton Registry.

INTRODUCTION

[2] The applicant, C, seeks compensation in respect of injuries suffered by her, arising out of an incident which occurred in Rockhampton on 23 August 2003. The respondent, Tyrone Gordon Reinecker, pleaded guilty before Judge Britton SC in the Rockhampton District Court on 16 February 2005 to one count of assault occasioning bodily harm and two counts of indecent assault. The respondent was sentenced to two years' imprisonment on each count, suspended after serving six months with an operational period of three years.

FACTS
[3] The facts as outlined by the sentencing Judge in his
sentencing remarks are as follows:-
"The complainant was a 19 year old girl at the time. She
pulled up at a telephone booth because she was trying to
get directions to a place where she was to attend a
party. You [the respondent] were there, you allowed her
to make a short telephone call, and then when she
returned to her car you followed her and ultimately you
struck her. You put a hand over her mouth and a finger
went inside her mouth and caused her to suffer some small
injury.
[4] More significantly, however, you roughly grabbed her
right breast under her bra, and in the course of doing
that it appears that her nipple was scratched. She
screamed and struggled, you continued to hold her. You
placed your hand inside her underwear and pressed hard
against her anus, but there was no penetration of her
anus, nor did you touch her in the vaginal area. She
continued to struggle and to scream and you ran off."
(Exhibit B (Sentencing Remarks), p.2, affidavit of Debbie
Richardson sworn 29 October 2008)
INJURIES
[5] The applicant seeks compensation for the following injuries which, it is submitted, are causally linked to the offences committed by the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading C v Reinecker

Details

AGLC: C v Reinecker [2009] QDC 96
Case: [2009] QDC 96
Decision Date: 3/04/2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of C v Reinecker involved an application for criminal injury compensation made by C, the applicant, against Tyrone Gordon Reinecker, the respondent. The dispute arose out of an assault occasioning bodily harm and an indecent assault, which resulted in functional impairments and other adverse impacts on the applicant. The matter was heard in the relevant court, which granted the applicant's application for compensation.

The court was required to determine several legal issues, including whether the injuries sustained by the applicant were a direct result of the respondent's actions, whether the injuries had caused functional impairments and other adverse impacts, and the appropriate amount of compensation to be awarded. The court also needed to consider the relevant statutory provisions governing criminal injury compensation.

In its reasoning, the court found that the applicant had established that the injuries were indeed caused by the respondent's actions, and that these injuries had resulted in functional impairments and other adverse impacts. The court carefully examined the evidence presented, including medical reports and expert testimony, to determine the extent of the applicant's injuries and the appropriate amount of compensation. The court concluded that the applicant was entitled to compensation of $48,000.

The court made an order that the respondent, Tyrone Gordon Reinecker, pay the applicant, C, the sum of $48,000. This amount was determined to be the appropriate compensation for the injuries and adverse impacts suffered by the applicant as a result of the respondent's actions. The court's decision provided the applicant with the financial support needed to address the consequences of the assault and indecent assault.

Orders

Orders of the court

That the respondent TYRONE GORDON

REINECKER pay the applicant C the sum of $48,

000.00.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	C v Reinecker [2009] QDC 96
PARTIES:	C v TYRONE GORDON REINECKER
FILE NO/S:	D4/2008
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON:	3 April 2009 (ex tempore)
DELIVERED AT:	Rockhampton
HEARING DATE:	3 April 2009
JUDGE:	Dearden DCJ
ORDER:	That the respondent TYRONE GORDON REINECKER pay the applicant C the sum of $48, 000.00.
CATCHWORDS:	APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – assault occasioning bodily harm – indecent assault – injuries including functional impairments - adverse impacts
LEGISLATION:	Criminal Offence Victims Act (Qld) 1995 ss 1A, 20, 22 (4), 24, 25, 26
CASES:	R v Ward; ex parte Dooley [2001] 2 Qd R 436
Riddle v Coffey [2002] 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA 337
Wren v Gaulai [2008] QCA 148 R v Attwell; ex parte Jullie [2002] 2 Qd R 367
COUNSEL:	Mr B Begg for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent