McEwen v Billy

[2001] QDC 227

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	McEwen v Billy [2001] QDC 227
PARTIES:	THERESA ANNE McEWEN (Applicant) PATRICK WILSON BILLY (Respondent)
FILE NO/S:	25 of 2001
DIVISION:
PROCEEDING:	Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING	Cairns
COURT:
DELIVERED ON:
DELIVERED AT:	Cairns
HEARING DATE:	25/05/2001
JUDGE:	White DCJ
ORDER:	That the respondent Patrick Wilson Billy pay the applicant Theresa Anne McEwen the sum of $60,000.
CATCHWORDS:
COUNSEL:
SOLICITORS:	Ms. T. Price Legal Aid Queensland

[1]

The Respondent, Patrick Wilson Billy, was convicted in the District Court at
Cairns on 30 October 2000, (inter alia) to the following offences:-

1.	That on the 23rd day of October 1999, at Coconut Island in the State of Queensland he raped Theresa Anne McEwen. AND
2.	That on the 23rd day of October 1999, at Coconut Island in the State of Queensland he raped Theresa Anne McEwen

This is an application by the said Theresa Anne McEwen for compensation pursuant to s.24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995.

1. The Applicant was born on 4 October 1959. She was therefore 40 at the time of the commission of the offences. She is now 41 years of age. At the time of these offences and for some years preceding it, the Applicant, her husband Marc Busch and the couple’s two young children Jack and Darcy (then aged 8 and 3 years respectively), had been living aboard the family’s 36 foot sloop “Paquita”. In 1990, the family embarked upon a circumnavigation of the globe by sea which was due to be completed upon their arrival at Thursday Island in the Torres Strait. On 22 October 1999, the family sailed into Australian waters and was extremely excited at the prospect of achieving their goal.

2. At around midday on 23 October 1999, the “Paquita” anchored about 200 metres off Coconut Island with the Applicant and her family on board. Having spoken with Australian Customs Officials the day before, the family was aware of quarantine restrictions which required that they remain on the vessel and not allow others to board for a period. This was not any real issue because the Applicant and her family had always been cautious on their voyage and never allowed strangers onto the vessel regardless. Nonetheless, they displayed a yellow quarantine flag and remained on board the yacht preparing for the final leg of the journey from Coconut Island to Thursday Island.

3. At approximately 1pm, the Respondent came along side the yacht in an aluminium dinghy. The Applicant recounted a friendly conversation with the Respondent whereby pleasantries were exchanged. During this exchange, a second dinghy pulled along side the Respondent’s boat. The Respondent introduced the occupant as his brother the Policeman from another island. There were also two young children in that second dinghy which left after about 5 minutes. The atmosphere of the conversation was such that Mr Busch felt he could ask the Respondent if he would fill some containers with drinking water from the island. The Respondent assured Mr Busch that the water on the island was quite safe and that he was happy to oblige.

4. At approximately 4.30pm the Respondent returned with the water and some gifts of soft drinks, sweets and other treats for the children. The Applicant had been exposed to the renowned generosity of the Torres Strait Islanders before and she accepted the gifts in good faith. The Respondent claimed that he had to wait for the tide to be favourable before he could return home and so he sat in his dinghy and another lengthy and friendly conversation of about 1-2 hours occurred between the Applicant, Mr Busch and the Respondent. The Respondent left for the second time shortly before sunset.

5. Undoubtedly, the Applicant and Mr Busch, who were usually quite cautious people, had begun to feel quite safe and comfortable. They had been travelling for some considerable length of time and had just returned to the relative safety of Australian waters, where they were apparently befriended by an altruistic local who was the brother of a Police Officer. I do not believe that the Respondent intentionally manufactured this situation in order to gain their trust, but I have no doubt that he later realised that this was a situation he could exploit and he concocted a story in order to do so.

6. At approximately 7.45pm, the Respondent approached the Applicant’s yacht in his dinghy. He told Mr Busch that he had heard a rumour that his brother the Policeman was going to raid the Paquita and search for drugs. Mr Busch replied, “We have nothing to hide. Let them come, if they are decent people like you, there won’t be a problem”. The conversation continued along this line for 1-2 minutes, at which point the Respondent stood up and stepped onto the yacht without warning. Mr Busch told the Respondent that he couldn’t come onto the yacht because of quarantine regulations and that he would have to leave. The Respondent refused. It was not until the Respondent produced a large knife and a roll of thick plastic adhesive tape that it became apparent that there was any danger.

7. The Respondent’s attitude changed completely. He became aggressive and while waving the knife at him demanded that Mr Busch to put his hands together so the Respondent could tie him up. All the while, both the Applicant and Mr Busch were trying to reason with the Respondent. Mr Busch backed away and the Respondent turned his attention towards the Applicant. Mr Busch called to the Applicant, “Don’t let him tie you up”. At this, the Respondent turned back towards Mr Busch. The Applicant grabbed at the knife and Mr Busch came to her aid. A struggle ensued between the three during which the Applicant sustained a cut to her hand that began bleeding profusely. The children were inside the cabin watching and Mr Busch called out to them to call for help on the ship’s radio. At this point the Respondent broke free of the couple and ran into the cabin. The Respondent snatched the microphone from the child, cut the cable and threw the microphone overboard.

8. The Applicant ran inside to protect the children who were crying by this stage. The Respondent then began to struggle with Mr Busch inside the cabin with the Applicant trying to comfort the children and pleading for him to stop. The Respondent managed to wrap some tape around Mr Busch’s forearms and he then chased Mr Busch up to the front of the yacht. The Applicant remained in the cabin with the children. Mr Busch was attempting to get his hands free when the Respondent struck him on the back of the head. Mr Busch fell to the deck, whereupon the Respondent proceeded to kick and punch him repeatedly. At this stage, the Respondent also bound Mr Busch’s legs. The Applicant and the children ran to the rear of the vessel and called for help, but to no avail.

9. The Applicant could hear the loud thuds of the Respondent kicking the head and body of her husband. Believing her children to be safe for the time being, the Applicant again ran to the front of the vessel where she saw the Respondent wrapping more tape around Mr Busch’s forearms and body. The Applicant attempted to grab the Respondent and pull him back. The Respondent turned and struck the Applicant across the side of the face with such force that it seems she almost lost consciousness. She staggered back towards the children, dazed, unsteady and urinating in her pants. The Applicant then realised there was little she could do but comfort the distraught children, now huddled inside the cabin. The Applicant recounts that this was made all the more difficult because the children’s anxiety was exacerbated by her bloodied state.

10. Before the Respondent returned to the front of the vessel, Mr Busch managed to free his hands from the tape. However, his legs were still bound. Mr Busch lay still as the Respondent approached and it appears as though the Respondent thought that Mr Busch was no longer a threat to him. The Respondent began pulling more tape off the roll and at some stage his hand, which was holding the knife, was resting against the bow rail of the vessel. Mr Busch grabbed the knife and threw it over board. The Respondent again became very angry and again punched and kicked Mr Busch while he was coiled up into a ball. Mr Busch managed to get to his feet, but the Respondent then lunged at him knocking him off balance and into the water.

11. The Applicant could hear her husband calling to her from the water as he was swept down the side of the vessel by the current. In her victim impact statement dated 21 September 2000, the Applicant recounts that she was aware that the current was very strong that night and she knew that her husband was not only badly beaten and also bound, but that he had probably been stabbed. She recounts how at this point and for the remainder of the ordeal, her mind was constantly occupied by the thought of her husband’s imminent death.

12. It seems that the Applicant did not have a chance to go to her husband’s aid because the Respondent came immediately to the rear of the vessel. The Respondent demanded guns, but the Applicant did not have any guns. She pleaded with the Respondent to take whatever he wanted and go, but he ignored her. She then offered to give him money and again he did not reply. The Respondent demanded that the Applicant give him radios, but the only radio on board was the VHS which had disabled earlier. Having retrieved the money from its hiding place, the Applicant attempted to hand it to the Respondent, he ignored her. The Respondent then went outside onto the deck. He said, “Have you got binoculars? Give me your binoculars”. The Applicant handed the respondent a pair of binoculars. The Respondent began scanning the water through the binoculars.

13. Hoping that he was looking for Mr Busch, the Applicant pleaded with the Respondent to go and find him. The Respondent said, “He’s alright. He’s playing games with me”. The Applicant then realised that the Respondent had an erection and that he intended to rape her. The Respondent turned to her and told her to remove her clothes.

14. In her Statement dated 26 October 1999, the Applicant describes the feeling of desperation which overwhelmed her. The Applicant realised that she could not fight off the Respondent if he again became violent and she was aware that if she offered any resistance the violence was likely to be considerable. She was unaware that the Respondent no longer had the knife. She realised that she could identify the Respondent and that he may be aware of this, and she became fearful for her own life and the lives of her children.

15. In addition to this, the Applicant was aware that her children would be able to hear and possibly see what was happening. She pleaded with the Respondent and tried to dissuade him by telling him that she had her period and that she had “peed” in her pants. All this had no effect on the Respondent. Eventually, the Applicant resigned herself to the realisation that the only hope she had of minimising the violence to her and the effect on the children was by not resisting. At this point, the Applicant had the presence of mind to reach in and draw the curtains of the cabin so that the children could not see her and the Respondent on the deck.

16. She was then forced to perform oral sex on the Respondent and was subjected to vaginal and anal rape. It seems as though the Respondent alternated between these three during the course of the ordeal, at one point forcing the Applicant to insert her finger into his anus while performing oral sex on him after he had raped her anally. The Respondent added insult to injury by taunting her repeatedly making insulting remarks. The Respondent would intermittently stop and walk over to the side of the vessel and look back towards the island. He claimed he was looking for Mr Busch. However, it seems more likely that he was looking to see if anyone was coming because the current had carried Mr Busch away from the direction of the island. On each such occasion, the Applicant would implore the Respondent to go and look for her husband, but he would not.

17. In addition to this, for the entire time, the Applicant could hear the children crying, in particular the child Jack who was calling out to his mother: "Where's Dad?" "Is Dad still in the water?" and "Mum, Mum is Patrick still there?" The Applicant was aware that Jack was old enough to have some understanding of what was happening and she tried to speak as normally as possible and appear as though everything was normal. She would say: "Its okay Jack, everything's fine" and "Just look after Darcy" and the like. The ordeal lasted for some 45 minutes and the Applicant struggled to maintain her composure throughout. She continuously tried to console her children and at every opportunity she tried to convince the Respondent to look for her husband whom she believed was swept out to sea.

18. Fortunately, Mr Busch was not swept out to sea. He had managed to free himself and eventually he found himself in a reverse current which carried him back closer to the shore. Mr Busch made his way to shore and then found a settlement where he raised the alarm. Upon hearing the sound of a number of approaching dinghies the Respondent ran to his dinghy still moored at the rear of the yacht, and fled. Those are the facts which constitute the offence.

19. The Applicant was taken to the Clinic on Coconut Island where she was examined by Nellie Miller, Registered Nurse. In a statement dated 24 October 1999, Sr Miller noted the following:-

    "6…she was extremely distraught. I noted bruising and swelling on the left side of her jaw. She had a laceration on the side of the right thumb which was deep and had broken the true skin. I noted bruising on her lower posterior and lateral calf and bruising to the fourth toe on her left foot.

    7… I obtained lower vaginal swabs, slides and PCR. PCR is a test for sexually transmitted diseases. I then obtained anal swaps, slides and PCR and I obtained blood samples for syphilis, Hepatitis B and C and HIV. I also obtained a urine sample for testing for sexually transmitted diseases. Prior to obtaining these samples, I removed what appeared to be pubic hairs from her mouth…"

20. On 24 October 1999, the Applicant was transported to Thursday Island Hospital for further observation. She was discharged on 25 October 1999. Also on 24 October 1999, the Thursday Island Police contacted Ms Annie Roberts of the Cairns Rape Crisis and Incest Service to provide counselling for the Applicant.

[22]	Ms Roberts has provided ongoing counselling to the Applicant and in her report dated 12 January 2001 the following was noted:-
"…the yacht 'Paquita' had been home to this family for 10 years. Both Jack and Darcy had spent their entire lives on board…'Paquita' was their safe haven… [This family] is gentle non-violent and private…

… counselling or support…

[The Applicant] is vegetarian and opposed to violence in all its forms. The family travelled the world and do not eat fish. They do not allow the boys to catch fish.

…
IMMEDIATE EFFECTS:

On first meeting Ms McEwen, I observed that she was visibly shaking and crying. She alternated between crying and trying to stay in control of her emotions… she was frequently dissociated… she had never been hit before and when 'Patrick' backhanded her and the knife cut her hand, she was terrified and stunned… Her words were 'I felt beaten and helpless'…

She could hear the grunts and kicks as Mr Busch was being kicked and beaten and then the realization that he was overboard. She knew the tide was running fast and she could hear the fear and desperation in his voice. She also knew he had been stabbed with the knife and he would be weakened by a loss of blood. She said 'I was terrified for Marc's life and the boys'.

… expressed feelings of 'violation', helplessness and absolute fear. She says a part of her felt 'dead'.

Ms McEwen's feelings of fear were exacerbated by the fact that she believed her partner would drown and she and her sons would be killed…

… date been unable to tell her family about it. This has also deprived her of the support of family and friends.

Ms McEwen states that memories are triggered daily by certain events on TV, newspaper articles, the boat and, of particular significance, her mensural period as she had her period when 'Patrick' raped her.

LONG TERM EFFECTS:

The constant intrusive memories have had an impact on her relationship with her partner… Her need to protect him from the pain of her assault prevents any discussion on the subject.

Ms McEwen continues to take on the role of 'Mum', 'carer' and 'protector' to the whole family. She says that she and her partner do not discuss their travels or the attack. She worries frequently about the impact on her eldest son, Jack…

…she finds it difficult to establish and develop close relationships.

… and cry.' She states that she feels 'swallowed up by it'.

… It is my opinion that Ms McEwen will suffer long term effects…"
[23]	In her Victim Impact Statement dated 21 September 2000, the Applicants attests to the following:-

"We live in a very small community and I have an intense need for privacy in regard to that period of my life. I cannot bear the idea of being the object of people's speculation so I have been unable to confide in anyone. No-one is close enough for me to feel comfortable talking about what happened. I am on my own in this. The worst times are when someone asks if we encountered any problems on our voyage. People are very curious about the prospect of piracy, when sailing. When it is brought up I get the horrors and want to run. I feel a sense of panic that must be obvious. At the same time I have a strong desire to get it all out in the open and that it is no longer our secret, but I simply can't.

The secret extends to my family in Melbourne. How can I tell Mum that I was raped over the phone and reassure her at the same time? I cannot pass that sadness onto her but still it intrudes on our conversation. I cannot relax and I find myself not contacting her. There is a barrier that wasn't there before. I want her pride not her sympathy.

Marc and I also do not talk about the details of that night except where it concerns the boys or the legal aspects of the case. We both know we went through a terrible time but we don't share our individual feelings or experiences at all…"

1. On 26 & 27 October 2000, the Applicant consulted Ms Christine Bovey, Psychologist. Ms Bovey issued a report dated 27 November 2000. It is convenient to paraphrase and summarise that report in the following terms:-

   1. Background Information:

   The Applicant describes herself as being “pretty shy” as a child and apart from having “had a few boyfriends” as a young adult, she appears to have lead a somewhat quiet and uneventful life prior to meeting her husband (Mr. Busch) whilst still in her early twenties.

   By this stage of her life, the Applicant had become more out-going and adventurous. Mr. Busch had a dream of sailing around the world in his own yacht. Ultimately, the Applicant was to share this dream. The couple worked and saved for some years in preparation and eventually finished the refurbishment of the yacht. They set sail in about 1989.

   The couple spent the next ten years circumnavigating the world. During which time, they had their two sons, Jack and Darcy.

   Prior to the events of October 1999, they were looking forward to celebrating their return to Australian waters and planned to write magazine articles about their experiences. They had great expectations about their future.

…
4. Psychological Assessment:

…
Personality Assessment Inventory [PAI]:

Ms McEwen completed a valid personality Assessment Inventory, which is designed to provide information relevant to clinical diagnosis, treatment planning and screening for psychopathology.

…
Clinical Features:

Ms McEwen’s PAI profile reveals that she occasionally experiences, or may experience to a mild degree, maladaptive behaviour patterns aimed at controlling anxiety…

Self Concept:

Ms McEwen’s self concept appears to involve a rather negative self- evaluation. She is likely to be self-critical, not handling setbacks very well and blaming herself for past failures and lost opportunities. She may inwardly be more troubled by self-doubt and misgivings about her adequacy than is apparent on the surface. She may tend to play down her accomplishments as heavily depending on the efforts and good will of others.

Interpersonal and Social Environment:

Ms. McEwen’s interpersonal style seems best characterised as self- effacing and lacking confidence in social interactions. She is likely to have difficulty in having her needs met in personal relationships and instead will subordinate her own interests to those of others in a manner that may seem self-punitive. Her failure to assert herself may result in mistreatment or exploitation by others, although, at this point, it appears that this strategy has been effective in maintaining her important relationships.

Trauma Symptom Inventory [TSI]:

This inventory assesses acute and chronic traumatic symptomatology, which resulted from an earlier traumatic event. The TSI evaluates Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD] and other psychological sequelae of traumatic events.

…
Ms. McEwen reported clinically significant responses on the scales of
Anxious Arousal (AA), Intrusive Experience (IE) and Defensive
Avoidance (DA) and Dissociation (DIS).

Ms. McEwen reports experiencing symptoms of anxiety and autonomic hyperarousal. At high levels, these symptoms may be associated with a DSM-IV post traumatic stress disorder. She likely experiences periods of trembling or shaking, nervousness, jumpiness, feeling ‘on edge’, excessive worrying, and fears of bodily harm. She may describe herself as tense and may report reacting to stress or sudden intrusive stimuli with fearfulness or an exaggerated startle response. She presents as being hyperalert and hypervigilant.

Ms. McEwen experiences posttraumatic reactions and symptoms such as nightmares, flashbacks, upsetting memories that are easily triggered by current events and repetitive thoughts of an unpleasant previous experience that intrude into awareness. Such symptoms are generally perceived as being unexpected and unwanted intrusions from ‘out of nowhere’, primarily involving reminiscence or re-experience of an especially upsetting event. He may be experiencing a sense of being out of control. The presence of elevated IE scores is often, but not implicitly, linked to a previous experience of psychological trauma. High IE scores typically reflect an intrusion of such traumatic material into the current awareness, of producing an associated state of distress.

She describes a history of aversive internal experiences that she repeatedly seeks to avoid. She also reports frequent attempts to eliminate painful thoughts or memories from conscious awareness. She often attempts to avoid events or stimuli in her environment that might restimulate upsetting thoughts or memories. Also present is the desire to neutralise negative feelings about previous traumatic experiences Such responses do not represent dissociation, repression or other similar psychological defences as much as they reflect conscious, intentional process of cognitive and behavioural avoidance as a way of managing post traumatic distress.

Ms. McEwen also experiences certain dissociative symptomatology. Such responses include cognitive disengagement, depersonalisation and derealisation, out of body experiences and emotional numbing. She may experience distractibility, ‘spacing out’, and feeling out of touch with her own body.

Ms McEwen’s TSI profile constitutes a classic posttraumatic presentation, in that she is reporting both intrusive (IE) and avoidant (DA) components of PTSD. Evaluations on these scales typically represent a chronic PTSD response to an event or events in the past. Such evaluations indicate relatively chronic symptoms that may have become more or less integrated into her personality. The experience of chronic PTSD is an aversive one that can result in serious psychological disability.

5. Psychological Opinion:

The above tests and interview material provides evidence that Ms. McEwen’s psychological condition meets the DSM-IV-TR criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder. Her state appears to be in the severe range as follows:-

A)

Exposure to a traumatic event in which both of the following were present:

1)	She experienced, witnessed and was confronted with an event that involved threatened death and serious injury to the physical integrity of self and others;
2)	Her response involved intense fear, helplessness and horror.

B)

The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in the following ways:

1)	Recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event, including, images thoughts and perceptions;
2)	Recurrent distressing dreams of the event;
3)	Acting or feeling as if the traumatic event was recurring;
4)	Intense psychological distress at exposure to internal or external cues that symbolise or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event;
5)	Psychological reactivity on exposure to internal or external cues that symbolise or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.

C)

Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing of general responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as indicated by;

1)	Efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or conversations associated with the trauma;
2)	Efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that arouse recollections of the trauma;
3)	Inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma;
4)	Markedly diminished interest in participating in significant activities;
5)	Feeling a detachment or estrangement from others;

6) Restricted range of effect;

7) Sense of foreshortened future.

D)

Persistent symptoms of increased arousal (not present before the trauma), as indicated by;

1)	Difficulty falling or staying asleep;
2)	Irritability or outbursts of anger;

3) Difficulty concentrating;

4) Hypervigilance;

5) Exaggerated startle response.

E) Duration of disturbance of more than 1 month…

F) The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

The duration of these symptoms is greater than 3 months, therefore the diagnosis is specified as being chronic.

DSM-IV-TS, Axis IV psychosocial and environmental problems:

Problems with primary support group:

Ms. McEwen’s children and partner were all involved in the incident. She is concerned for their wellbeing. She is the primary care giver in the family and devotes a great deal of time and energy taking care of her family’s need which have been magnified since the incident in October 1999. She has little energy or time to devote to her own recovery and spends a significant proportion of her time taking care of her family’s needs so that she can be kept busy. This allows her to ignore her own state of distress.

Problems with access to health care services:

Ms. McEwen should attend counselling to help resolve her psychological response to her experience. Unfortunately however, as a result of the isolated nature of her community, Ms. McEwen is unable to access appropriate counselling to assist her recovery from the incident in October, 1999.

6. Concluding Remarks Re: Regulation 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995:

A)	Ms. McEwen reports that she experienced a profound sense of violation as a result of Mr. Billy’s actions.
B)	Her psychological profile indicates that she has a diminished sense of self worth, she is threat sensitive, shy and withdrawn…
C)	Ms. McEwen meets the diagnostic criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
G)	Ms. McEwen is hypervigilant and constantly afraid. Further she reports that as a result of her experience she is now [since the rape] afraid of indigenous males… She currently resides in a community in which there is a relatively large indigenous population. Consequently, she experiences a consistent reminder of her experience and is constantly afraid for her safety.
H)	Whilst Ms. McEwen’s family is supportive, there is some evidence of problems in her relationship. She is constantly in tears and experiences anxiety as a result of her psychological response to the incident. The burden places additional stress on her family unit. Further, she has been unable to tell her extended family or friends about the incident because of her concern for their state of mind. She feels that they will worry about her too much and she reports being “too ashamed to tell them”. Consequently, she and her family have “this big family secret” which places further burden on them. Finally, at the time of the interview, although Mr. Busch was aware that Ms. McEwen had been raped, he did not know the details of the rape. Ms. McEwen reports that she did not want him to worry about her and Mr. Busch reports that he did not wish to hear the details. Their decision not to discuss Ms. Ewen’s experience in detail, deepens “the secret”.

I)   Ms. McEwen reports that the incident has adversely impacted on the couple’s sexual relationship.

J)

The Applicant suffers significant psychological scaring associated with the rapes and the brutality of the incident. She is unable to maintain equilibrium in her life and spends much of her time and energy just trying to forget the incident. However, she reports this is difficult because the memories intrude into her awareness on a regular basis. She feels “stuck” in a time frame and is unable to cease the intrusive memories, which can be activated by a seemingly insignificant and unassociated trigger.

K)

Mr. Billy’s trial was set down for 30 October, 2000 and it was not until 27 October 2000 that Ms. McEwen was advised that Mr. Billy would be pleading guilty. As a result, the Applicant and her family had travelled to Cairns and were forced to relive the experiences again whilst preparing for cross-examination during the trial.

[25]

I am satisfied that there was no conduct on the part of the applicant which
contributed to her injuries.

[26]

I am satisfied that the evidence supports a claim for compensation under the
following items contained in the Schedule to the Act –

1.	Bruising/laceration etc (minor/moderate)
2.	Mental or nervous shock (severe)

[27]

I am also satisfied that the applicant has a claim for the adverse impacts of a
sexual offence pursuant to Regulation 1A.

1. Because there is considerable overlapping I do not consider it appropriate to attempt to assess compensation under each item separately. I consider $60,000 to be an appropriate amount to compensate the applicant.