Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1983 and Kerri Anne Cribb Cic [1992] ACTSC 16 (2 March 1992)

SUPREME COURT OF THE ACT

CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ACT 1983 AND KERRI ANNE CRIBB
C.I.C No. 11 of 1991
Criminal Injuries Compensation

COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Master A. Hogan(1)

CATCHWORDS

Criminal Injuries Compensation - Sexual Assaults - Behaviour contributing to Injury - Post Traumatic Stress Disorder - Pre-existing Disabilities - No Issue of Principle.

Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1983 s15 (1)

HEARING

CANBERRA
2:3:1992

ORDER

Compensation be awarded to the applicant in the sum of $20,186.00.

DECISION

This is an application for compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1983.

2. On 16 July 1991 an indictment was presented in this Court against one Michael Robert Wyatt containing four counts of sexual assault against the complainant.

3. He was convicted on each count. In respect of the offences of engaging in sexual intercourse without consent and assault with intent to engage in sexual intercourse, sentences of nine years imprisonment in each case were imposed, and in relation to the offences of committing an act of indecency, sentences of three years imprisonment to be served concurrently with the other sentences, were imposed.

4. The sentencing Judge fixed a non-parole period which will expire on 20 February 1999.

5. On 4 January 1990 the applicant was thirty years of age. She had the care of her three children, and was living on the single mothers' pension. Life had not been easy for her. She had been a victim of domestic violence and grew up in a alcoholic home. In a victim impact statement that she made for the purposes of the sentencing of Wyatt she stated that she was a recovering alcoholic. It is clear that she had consumed a great deal of liquor on the evening of the offence, and when Doctor Tennant saw her in March and April 1991 she formed the view that the applicant had suffered some brain damage as a result of long term abuse of chemical substances.

6. In her impact statement she wrote,
"I guess life was never a bed of roses, but I did have a zest

for life and was always a happy go-lucky girl. At least that's
how I would describe myself until the rape."

7. On the one hand it is clear that it would be wrong to attribute all her present disabilities to the assault, but I also think it likely that her physical and emotional health was such that an attack of the nature that was committed upon her would have a devastating effect.

8. In sentencing the offender Mr Justice Gallop made the following remarks,

"The complainant had been drinking and playing pool at various
night spots from about 8pm until 5.30am. So had the accused. It
is trite to observe that society generally would disapprove of the
complainant's behaviour. She had consumed, according to her, in
the order of 14 rum and cokes during the night and the independent
evidence was that she was moderately affected by alcohol. If she
had not placed herself in such a precarious situation the
offences, of course, would not have been committed. But even
women who behave in that fashion are entitled to the protection of
the law against serious sexual assaults. The jury obviously
looked at the matter in that way."

9. I did not understand Counsel for the Territory to be submitting that an order should not be made or that the amount of compensation to be awarded should be reduced by reference to the considerations set out in s15 (1) of the Act.

10. On perusing the material in this application, I think that Counsel was right in not making any such submission. She had left the nightclub when it closed. Her assailant left at the same time, not to go in company with her, but because the premises were closing. She was proceeding towards Northbourne Avenue to catch a taxi to go home. He came up behind her, grabbed her by the hair at the back of her head and pushed her some distance to a toilet block in Haig Park, where, by menaces and with violence he committed the offences. In those circumstances I do not think that any behaviour or condition of hers directly or indirectly contributed to her injury.

11. Physically she was not seriously injured. She did suffer a bump to the back of her head when she was pushed up against the wall of the toilet block. Nevertheless, in order to force her to submit, he threatened to punch her, to kill her with his belt, and pulled her head into various positions by her hair. Two of the counts on which he was convicted related to indecent assaults, one to an act of oral sex and one to full vaginal intercourse. The attack was brutal, pitiless and degrading.

12. She swore that throughout the period of the assault she expected that she would be killed. Doctor Tennant who saw her on a number of occasions had no doubt that she genuinely had that belief. I also do not doubt it.

13. As a result of the assault she suffered severe post-traumatic stress disorder. She became continually anxious and depressed, she had severe nightmares and trouble sleeping. She was afraid to go out alone. She became reclusive and afraid for the safety of her children. To overcome her problems she sought new environments and has moved to a coastal town where she is trying to re-establish her life. The counselling she received from the Rape Crisis Centre did not give her much help. She continues to receive psychological counselling. Her relationship with her children, especially her eldest daughter, has been affected.

14. She courageously endured the trauma of giving evidence and being cross-examined at the trial, but the experience greatly distressed her, and I regard that distress as being an inevitable consequence of the assault and proper to be taken into account when awarding compensation.

15. Doctor Tennant's opinion concludes,

"I believe she needs help in overcoming the stress reaction
she has suffered following an extremely stressful attack upon her.
However, her drug dependency and resulting brain damage and
disorganisation makes it quite impossible to treat her. I fear
the added problem of this post-traumatic stress has further
escalated her already serious problems and her prognosis is very
poor."

16. At the time this application was brought the limit on the compensation that could be awarded was $20,000.00. I do not think I need to add further detail in order to justify my conclusion that it is proper to award her compensation in that amount.

17. The costs of bringing the application were $186.00.

18. I award compensation in the sum of $20,000 plus $186.00 being the costs of this application.