Sueing 7 years after an attempted rape

hamesy said:
What he done was wrong, but do you think she would have sued if he didnt win the lottery?
Click to expand...
Well obviously not, even if she had won she would have got an award of damages which the guy would be unable to pay, plus an award of costs which the guy would be unable to pay, so all she would achieve is having to pay an ass-load of money in legal fees for no result.

Whether it's right or not, there is little to no point in suing someone of limited means.
 
Sic said:
Rape (and even attempted rape :/) is an abhorrent crime, and you deserve everything that comes to you for raping anyone (regardless of age) and you should never be allowed to forget, or be forgiven for it. If this is allowed then hopefully it'll act as more of a deterrent than the current punishments.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying it is. But how do you know that he isn't true reformed and trying to put the past by him and do some good.

Also, where do you draw the line between things we can forgive and can't. When a friend of mine was burgled she wanted to move home because she felt so violated. Does that mean the burglar should never be forgiven or a chance to reform?
 
hamesy said:
What he done was wrong, but do you think she would have sued if he didnt win the lottery?
Click to expand...

Nope.

But I want to know who are her solicitors? and why they didn't tell her "no, the limitation period has gone and you won't win, simple as that".
 
chesterstu said:
I'm not denying it is. But how do you know that he isn't true reformed and trying to put the past by him and do some good.

Also, where do you draw the line between things we can forgive and can't. When a friend of mine was burgled she wanted to move home because she felt so violated. Does that mean the burglar should never be forgiven or a chance to reform?
Click to expand...

he has been accused of 5 counts of sexual assault in various forms on different people. He won't ever learn his lesson.

With regard to crime, I think that the victim should be entitled to whatever it takes to make them feel comfortable again. In your friend's case, in a perfect world for me, the burglar would have to pay any fees that your friend had to pay for moving house, and any loss of earnings she may have accrued in the move. The problem with the punishment system we have is that it doesn't make any effort to repair the damage done - great, so the criminal might be behind bars, but sometimes that doesn't help the victim.

edit: I also think that if the person couldn't afford to pay these "damages" (I have no legal knowledge - this is probably obvious!) at the time, any money he comes into should be proportioned so he can afford to live the bare minimum until the victim is repaid. If the criminal wins the lottery, all of their victims should be entitled to a cut of that, in my opinion.
 
Was DLA Piper who were representing Mrs. A, I imagine she was probably funded by an organisation as a test case.

As I said earlier, the limitation act isn't absolute, so a challenge like this was probably inevitable, it's just a matter of getting the right case and the requisite funding to go ahead with it.

The Limitation Act is a funny one really, as far as I'm aware the reason that it exists is because after 6 years or so there are problems with the right to a fair trial, also for companies I suppose there has to be some kind of cut-off point to allow them to quantify their litigation risks. However it also provides an artificial barrier to access to justice, so it's a tricky balance to strike really.
 
Last edited:
andyp said:
Why should she get one single penny?
Click to expand...

Because her life has been destroyed by the man who should still be behind bars as he is a multiple rapist.


And to those who say people should forgive and forget, I know a woman who was beaten and raped when she was 14, she is now 35, and still wakes up in the middle of the night crying, has nightmares at least a couple of times a week about it and cant talk about it without breaking down, its effected her working life, her personal life everything, for over 20 years.

He on the other hand i would suspect does not lose a single nights sleep over the matter.

People really should not comment AT ALL about subjects like this unless they have experienced or have tried to help someone deal with rape.
Because you simply do not and will not ever understand it until do.
 
SK07 said:
He doesn't deserve the money, should all be taken off him and stuck into charity or some sort of children/cancer foundation.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, if you can purchase a ticket you are allowed to win.
 
andyp said:
So?

What has money got to do with that?
Click to expand...

What other recourse does she have to try and punish the man?

Rape is a life sentence, he shouldnt of even been in a situation where he was allowed the chance to gamble on anything, where as she has had to live on with what he did to her, he has shown no remorse and you can bet your bottom dollar he will care a damn site more about loosing money than he ever did about abusing women.
 
SK07 said:
He doesn't deserve the money, should all be taken off him and stuck into charity or some sort of children/cancer foundation.
Click to expand...

WTF, he bought a ticket and won fair and square, are you saying anyone who wins the lottery should be judged on how good they are before being allowed the money?
 
Tefal said:
and therein lies the problem, punishment is dealt by the courts via prison time and fines, this should not be about punishment.
Click to expand...

And ultimately by the government and the house of lords, your argument will hold true if they agree to let her sue i trust?
Because if they do, they and you, will be agreeing with me.
 
Also bear in mind that the recovery of damages through the civil courts for a criminal action isn't new at all but has always been available.

For example, if you get beaten up, you can recover money from the CICB (Criminal Injuries Compensation Board) for your injuries, however this is likely to be well below what you would be awarded in a civil court.

You can then sue your attacker for damages in excess of that awarded by the CICB, however in a lot of cases the assailant has limited or no means, and as I mentioned before, there is little point in pursuing such an individual as it's costly and will not result in any money being recovered.

Therefore it's not so much a matter of him being punished twice, if he had the money when he attacked the woman she could have sued him there and then. Plus it's hardly 'punishment' when you're compensating someone for the distress you caused them by your own actions. His punishment was the jail sentence, this case simply deals with the limitation act on whether he should still have to compensate the woman for the results of his actions.
 
He played/won the lottery whilst on day-release.

She's clearly entitled to damages, i'm not saying, but going after him now that he's got money is just pathetic.
 
atpbx said:
What other recourse does she have to try and punish the man?
Click to expand...

It's not up to her to punish him, it's up to the criminal justice system to deem fit a sentence for the crime he's been convicted of.

That's happened.
 
andyp said:
It's not up to her to punish him, it's up to the criminal justice system to deem fit a sentence for the crime he's been convicted of.

That's happened.
Click to expand...


DO you have a partner?

Male or female?

And if they were raped you could live with the perpetrator being given an 18 month sentance and living down the road from you and your partner again?
You wouldn't want to do anything to him either before or after the court had had the chance to pass judgment?

Someone hits you dont fight back?
Someone steals your car you dont give the guy a good hiding if you catch him first?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom