Vlug v Carrasco

[2006] QDC 306

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Vlug  v Carrasco [2006] QDC 306

PARTIES:

NICOLE FRANCES MARIA VLUG

Applicant
v

VICTOR MANUEL CARRASCO

Respondent

FILE NO/S:

65/06

DIVISION:

Civil Jurisdiction

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

Southport

DELIVERED ON:

25 August 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Southport

HEARING DATE:

23 June 2006

JUDGE:

Dearden  DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent Victor Manuel Carrasco pay the applicant Nicole Frances Maria Vlug the sum of $19,500.00.

CATCHWORDS:

APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – Assault Occasioning Bodily Harm – Mental or Nervous Shock - Adverse Impacts

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995

Riddle v Coffey [2002] 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA 337

R v Attwell ex parte Jullie [2002] 2 Qd R 367

R v Ward; ex parte Dooley [2001] 2 QDR 436

COUNSEL:

Mr L R Smith for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Messrs Collas Morrow Ross for the applicant

1. The applicant, Nicole Vlug, seeks compensation in respect of injuries suffered by her arising out of the conviction of Victor Carrasco, after a jury trial, of one count of assault occasioning bodily harm which occurred on 7 July 2001, and counts of assault occasioning bodily harm and rape which occurred on 20 February 2002.  The respondent went to trial before Hall DCJ and a jury at the District Court, Southport on a six‑count indictment which alleged three counts of assault occasioning bodily harm and three counts of rape[1], but he was convicted only in respect of count 2 (assault occasioning bodily harm on 7 July 2001), count 5 (assault occasioning bodily harm on 20 February 2002) and count 6 (rape on 20 February 2002).  The jury verdict was returned on 18 August 2003 and the respondent was sentenced by Hall DCJ on 25 September 2003.  The respondent was sentenced to three years’ goal, suspended after serving six months’ imprisonment with a three-year operational period in respect of count 6 (rape) and was sentenced to one months’ imprisonment (concurrent) in respect of each of the charges of assault occasioning bodily harm.  A period of 35 days pre-sentence custody was deemed time served under the sentence.

   [1]Exhibit MAM1, affidavit of Michelle Meighoo sworn 25 January 2006

FACTS & INJURIES

1. In summarising the facts and injuries sustained by the applicant, I have accessed the trial transcript, which should have formed part of the material relied upon by the applicant’s counsel.  It is clear that the evidence adduced at the respondent’s trial, and the conclusions drawn by the sentencing Judge in respect of that evidence (and consequent verdicts, as applicable) are the essential basis of the factual matrix on which the criminal compensation application is to proceed[2].  It is not sufficient merely to rely on the sentencing remarks of the trial Judge[3], particularly in this case, where the transcript reveals extensive submissions from both prosecution and defence counsel preceding those sentencing remarks.  However, given the provisions of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“COVA”) s 30(3), I have been able to consider the application by accessing…