P v P

[2004] QDC 160

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

P v P [2004] QDC 160

PARTIES:

P (Applicant)

v.

P ( Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

42/2003

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Criminal Compensation Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court Ipswich

DELIVERED ON:

26/5/04

DELIVERED AT:

Ipswich

HEARING DATE:

24/2/04

JUDGE:

Richards DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant the sum of $ 11,250 by way of compensation under the Act

CATCHWORDS:

Compensation – separation of injuries

SOLICITORS:

R. Hartfiel of M A Kent & Assoc for Applicant

B. Gray of MacFie Curlewis & Spiro for the Respondent

1. This is an application for criminal compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995.  The applicant is an 11 year old girl who was indecently dealt with by the respondent on two separate occasions.  The respondent took the matter to trial and was acquitted of a third act of indecent treatment and one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child under 12. 

1. The acts were said to have occurred in or about November 2001.

They occurred on two separate occasions and involved the respondent on one occasion rubbing himself against the applicant’s upper leg, kissing her on the lips and putting his tongue in her mouth and on the other occasion rubbing the top of her leg and kissing her on the lips. 

1. The applicant child has attended counselling in relation to the matter and it is said that she suffers anxiety attacks when going to the toilet, disturbed sleep, nightmares, vomiting, depression, loss of self confidence and self esteem, and flashbacks.  It was submitted that she has since developed a phobia about going to the toilet which has apparently affected her schooling. She has now been given a red card at school so that she can go to the toilet as needed.  It is said that the phobia in relation to the toileting developed because the respondent would harass her when she was on the toilet.  However, those allegations relate to the maintaining charge of which the respondent was acquitted.  The purpose of this application is to compensate her for the offences of which the respondent was convicted, and they do not relate to any incidents occurring in or near a toilet.

1. The incidents were fairly minor in nature and whilst they must have been distressing because the respondent was her stepfather and had been for some years, it is hard to attribute all her difficulties to these two offences. 

1. It is submitted that the applicant has difficulties at school and suffers from sleep disturbance and nightmares.  She found the trial process very difficult and upsetting and was prescribed anti-depressants to overcome feelings of depression.  She has suffered a loss of innocence and trust and has been left with feelings of guilt and responsibility for the respondent’s actions.  It is said that she suffers flashbacks to the offence which trigger panic and anxiety attacks.  Her reports from school are good and it would appear that she is a well liked and well behaved student.  It is said that she needs ongoing psychological and psychiatric treatment. 

1. The applicant was seen by Dr Britton for a psychological report and she details much more extensive abuse than that of which the respondent was convicted.  In the circumstances of the abuse as the applicant describes it, it is unsurprising that she has suffered post-traumatic stress disorder.  The question on this application is what effect did the two acts of indecent dealing have on the applicant?

1. In my view, even though there were more extensive allegations made against the respondent, the offences for which the respondent was convicted would have substantially contributed to her trauma and as a result she is entitled to compensation under the Act .  She is entitled to compensation for mental or nervous shock of a minor kind and a sum of $7,500 should be allowed. 

1. In relation to adverse impacts, many of the impacts suggested come within the diagnosis of post- traumatic stress. The adverse impacts that appear to be separate from that diagnosis are initial problems at school and the necessity to take time off school to recover from the incidents and to give evidence at the trial.  In those circumstances it seems to me that an allowance of 5% of the Scheme maximum should be given for adverse impacts, and accordingly $3,750 is awarded.  This makes a total of $11,250.

ORDER

1. The Respondent is ordered to pay the applicant the sum of $11,250 compensation for injuries suffered pursuant to the Act