Victim Pays Rapist Compensation

#1
CLAIM BROUGHT TOO LATE

The victim of Lotto rapist Iorworth Hoare must pay £100,000 towards his legal costs after she lost her bid to sue him for compensation.

The 76-year-old woman was challenging an earlier ruling banning her from claiming compensation, but a judge decided to uphold the ban.


http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13450220,00.html

They say that time's a healer - the judge obviously belives this!
Quite outstanding, wrong in my view and a dangerous precedent.
 
#3
Zofo said:
CLAIM BROUGHT TOO LATE

The victim of Lotto rapist Iorworth Hoare must pay £100,000 towards his legal costs after she lost her bid to sue him for compensation.

The 76-year-old woman was challenging an earlier ruling banning her from claiming compensation, but a judge decided to uphold the ban.


http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13450220,00.html

They say that time's a healer - the judge obviously belives this!
Quite outstanding, wrong in my view and a dangerous precedent.
What the %^&k has the once GREAT Britain lowered itself to?!!!!! We should all bombard our crap Government about this!!!
 
#4
Zofo said:
They say that time's a healer - the judge obviously belives this!
Quite outstanding, wrong in my view and a dangerous precedent.
As I understand it, the law gives the judge no choice - it states that all claims have to be brought within a certain time. This claim wasn't. Morally of course it's completely different, but the judge has to act according to the law in this case :(
 
#5
...even ignoring the fact that he has £7million from a lottery win and can (we therefore presume) easily afford to pay his own legal costs, ensued originally by a crime that he DID commit (was convicted of).
 
#6
BRILLIANT. The best thing is if she refuses to pay she could be sent to prison with all the other old folk who can't pay their council tax. They could open a special wing so the old people don't annoy the other prisoners by insisting tho watch Murder she Wrote or whatever old people watch
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#7
Badger_lady said:
...even ignoring the fact that he has £7million from a lottery win and can (we therefore presume) easily afford to pay his own legal costs, ensued originally by a crime that he DID commit (was convicted of).
But he'll sit there and laugh. I hope he gets knifed in the showers.
 
#8
pdf27 said:
Zofo said:
They say that time's a healer - the judge obviously belives this!
Quite outstanding, wrong in my view and a dangerous precedent.
As I understand it, the law gives the judge no choice - it states that all claims have to be brought within a certain time. This claim wasn't. Morally of course it's completely different, but the judge has to act according to the law in this case :(
Then surely the judge has at least ways and means of lessening costs - I mean, 100K + damages!
I agree that he's caught with the law and we know the law's an ass. Unless he firmly belives that the old dear should pay then there must be law lord/law "upkeeper" session to knock this sort of thing on the head?
 
#9
Zofo said:
Then surely the judge has at least ways and means of lessening costs - I mean, 100K + damages!
I agree that he's caught with the law and we know the law's an ass. Unless he firmly belives that the old dear should pay then there must be law lord/law "upkeeper" session to knock this sort of thing on the head?
If I remember correctly she brought this case under a "no win-no fee" type arrangement with her solicitors. Again IIRC it is normal in that sort of case for the person bringing the case to buy insurance against losing and having to pay the other side's legal costs before bringing the case (I'm not a lawyer so am not sure - if there are any that can comment about?).
If this is the case she won't be liable for the fees, the insurers will. I certainly hope so - forcing her to pay personally may be law but certainly not justice.
 
#11
pdf27 said:
Zofo said:
Then surely the judge has at least ways and means of lessening costs - I mean, 100K + damages!
I agree that he's caught with the law and we know the law's an ass. Unless he firmly belives that the old dear should pay then there must be law lord/law "upkeeper" session to knock this sort of thing on the head?
If I remember correctly she brought this case under a "no win-no fee" type arrangement with her solicitors. Again IIRC it is normal in that sort of case for the person bringing the case to buy insurance against losing and having to pay the other side's legal costs before bringing the case (I'm not a lawyer so am not sure - if there are any that can comment about?).
If this is the case she won't be liable for the fees, the insurers will. I certainly hope so - forcing her to pay personally may be law but certainly not justice.
And there you have highlighted what the Judge was really doing. Someone else going to foot the bill? Crank up the fees lads - pay day is here again!

Until the boys club that sees Barristers become Judges if they suck enough **** is ended this will continue. The worst part is that many of these bright young things realise they wont all become Judges so make sure they fill the House of Commons instead! No wonder juries are confused in fraud trials - they cant figure out who are the crooks.

Rant done!
 
#12
I sit here and wonder why nothing suprises me any more.

If the claim is "out of date" surely it would cost less than £100,000 to check the dates of the crime/date of compensation and hey presto no court case in the first place.

Or is that just too much common sense?

The law is w**k. He did the crime, he can pay. He is scum.
 
#13
Biscuits_AB said:
Badger_lady said:
...even ignoring the fact that he has £7million from a lottery win and can (we therefore presume) easily afford to pay his own legal costs, ensued originally by a crime that he DID commit (was convicted of).
But he'll sit there and laugh. I hope he gets knifed in the showers.
Well said! I would be pleased as punch if that happened to the scumbag rapist! What a country we live in!!!!! 8O Whatever happened to our once great nation that led the world ?????
 
#14
I want to punch the wall but I'd break my fcuking hand. If the Judge is bound by the law then why have a judge?

The law is ruining innocent peoples lives.

If I was 76, had been raped and now was being kicked in the face I think I'd go on a judge and barrister killing spree.
 
#16
The old dear should say 'Bollox, send me to prison for not paying.' and camp outside the Home office waiting to be arrested.'

If she does that I'll join her!
 
#17
"As I understand it, the law gives the judge no choice - it states that all claims have to be brought within a certain time. This claim wasn't. Morally of course it's completely different, but the judge has to act according to the law in this case :([/quote]"

And the laws are made by the politian's, so there's a surprise!
 
#18
she could always employ Mr bLiar's other half, but then again 'The Victim' isnt a peado or a criminal so no qudos there so she wont take up the case, and 'The Victim' prob isnt onlegal aid so no g'tee of getting paid, so absolutly no chance of gettin the wide mouth frog to represent her then!

Try calling the Police, oh their there to arrest her, to uphold the law?

Oh I give up she's doomed, what a civilised society we live in:toilet:
 
#20
mark1234 said:
Does this crap like this actually shock anyone anymore.
No it doesn't. Tomorrow there will be another injustice to kick us all in the teeth. Some poor old lady will be arrested for feeding the pigeons or a man will be arrested and handcuffed for refusing to return a childs football or a victim of rape will have to pay her multi millionaire attacker £100k because she was outside the time limit.... and so on and so on.

I wonder what tomorrow's story of woe will be. Another drink driver knocking down and killing a child and getting 3 months in nick?

Did you see Nassem Hamed, the boxer, when he left jail? £280k RR, £180k stretched Range Rover and music blasting out on arrival to pick the man up. Very civil. Cnut.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top