Husted v Meizer

[2001] QSC 323

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Husted v Meizer [2001] QSC 323

PARTIES:

JACQUELINE GAYLE HUSTED
(applicant)
v
LYELL GRANT MEIZER
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

S3462 of 2001

DIVISION:

Trial Division

DELIVERED ON:

30 August 2001

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

14 August 2001

JUDGE:

Philippides J

ORDER:

1) That the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $25,000 by way of compensation for the injury suffered by the applicant by reason of the offences of which the respondent was convicted on 10 November 1988;
2) That the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the application to be assessed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – COMPENSATION – Compensation for nervous shock – respondent convicted of rape and sodomy – claim under s 663B(1) Criminal Code (Qld)

Criminal Code (Qld), s 663AA(1), s 663AA(2), s 663AA (3); s 663B(1) and (2)

R v Bridge and Madams; Ex parte Larkin [1989] 1 Qd R 554
R v Farrell; Ex parte Farrell (Motion Nos 2985 and 2196 of 1992), unreported, 13 July 1992
Re MJ Hudson (No 358 of 1992), unreported, 26 August 1992
McClintock v Jones (1995) 79 A Crim R 238

COUNSEL:

A J Kimmins for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

T Bailey for the applicant

1. PHILIPPIDES J: On 24 April 2001 Jacqueline Gayle Husted (“the applicant”) filed an application seeking compensation pursuant to s 663B(1) of the Criminal Code (Qld) (“the Code”) for injuries she sustained as a result of the offences of rape and sodomy committed on 5 June 1987 for which the respondent was convicted on 10 November 1988.

1. The offences were committed prior to the commencement of Part III of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995. Chapter 65A of the Criminal Code therefore applied, as if not repealed: see s46(2) Criminal Offence Victims Act. Chapter 65A included s663B of the Code. Section 663B(1) of the Code provides that the Court may, on the application of a person aggrieved by an offence committed on him or her, order the offender to pay to that person a sum not exceeding the prescribed amount by way of injury suffered by that person by reason of the offence or offences of which the offender is convicted.

1. Although served with the application, the respondent did not appear on the hearing of the application.

1. The applicant was born on 23 July 1969 and was aged 17 at the time of the offences.  At the time of the offences the applicant was working as a prostitute in the Valley.  At about 9.30 p.m. on 5 June 1987 she was standing on Brunswick Street, when the respondent drove up to her and said “I’m a cop from Forensic, now get in”.  The applicant did as instructed and entered the passenger side of the vehicle.  The applicant was induced to do this because she thought she was being charged with something and was being taken to the Valley police station.  The applicant was thus abducted.  The respondent physically attacked the applicant, forced the applicant to…