so she obviously deserved it...

[Biker Biggles]

Beaten to it by quick hands Sarah.

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

Beaten to it by quick hands Sarah.

Originally Posted by sarah

That's not what the article says.

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

I dont think so Baph.

Originally Posted by the article

The woman, whose attacker has never been caught, complained to the Metropolitan Police about the way her case was investigated.

As a result of her complaint, she received an official apology and two officers were disciplined.
But when she applied for compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), which covers England, Scotland and Wales, she was told the standard compensation would be cut in her case to £8,250. The authority told her the reason for the reduction was that "the evidence shows that your excessive consumption of alcohol was a contributing factor in the incident".

To me, that reads that the compensation came about after her complaint against the Police. This could of easily been for emotional stress caused by the way the Police dealt with the case - which could well be classed as an injury.

Originally Posted by Baph

To me, that reads that the compensation came about after her complaint against the Police. This could of easily been for emotional stress caused by the way the Police dealt with the case - which could well be classed as an injury.

Not a criminal injury though.

Admit it. You are wrong

Originally Posted by sarah

Not a criminal injury though.

Admit it. You are wrong

If I believed I was wrong I would. However, like I said, the way the article reads, she complained, got an apology, then applied for compensation.

Re-read the thread, I'm not the only one that thinks that way.

EDIT: The rapist was never caught (as stated in the article), and as such, there was no guilty party - that doesn't mean that the crime didn't happen though. This is another reason for me to doubt that compensation was awarded as a result of the crime, and rather as a result of the investigation.

Im gonna go out


Get **** faced



Find a geezer bird to rape me





The sue the feck out of the taxpayer who's going to pay me lots of compensation..



Girls shouldn't be raped, but with the nutcases out there, when you wear a top just covering your nipples, a skirt short enough to be a belt, and knee high boots like a hooker, then polugh yourself in makeup (to make you feel good, not be be attractive to the opposite sex at all..........), then go out and get hammered beyond control, well, your asking for some kind of trouble arn't you.

Not saying I agree with it at all, but then im a nice guy, but the world is full of nasty ones, so you girls take your choice..... A pair of jeans is much harder to get off than a short skirt.... If your on a real bender, wear jeans.

Its peoples responsibility to look after themselves too you know.....

but the fact of the matter is only a small percentage of rape cases are ever brought forward to the police as the conviction rate is so pathetic.

this is largely to do with the difficulty in proving that there was no consent given at the time of the alleged rape. its important to remember that if either or both parties have been drinking it makes this even harder to prove.

my concern is simply the claim culture we all seem to like in today and the fact people feel entitled to money in these situations and seem more concerned with it than the conviction itself.

Originally Posted by Baph

If I believed I was wrong I would. However, like I said, the way the article reads, she complained, got an apology, then applied for compensation.

Re-read the thread, I'm not the only one that thinks that way.

EDIT: The rapist was never caught (as stated in the article), and as such, there was no guilty party - that doesn't mean that the crime didn't happen though. This is another reason for me to doubt that compensation was awarded as a result of the crime, and rather as a result of the investigation.

CICA, the clue's in the name.

Originally Posted by neillfergie

this is largely to do with the difficulty in proving that there was no consent given at the time of the alleged rape. its important to remember that if either or both parties have been drinking it makes this even harder to prove.

Government 'initiatives' giving the woman the choice to not have to stand in court to give her evidence, and that the defence can no longer ask about the womans previous sexual habits havn't helped conviction rates either.

[Biker Biggles]

Baph.Go on the CICA website and read what they do and what they are for.All will be revealed.They are essentially there to compensate victims of crime(not police incompetance)when the perpetrater either cannot be found or has no means of paying out the victim.In this case she got an apology from the Police,two officers were diciplined-------New sentance-------She applied to CICA and got-----Blablabla.
The CICA bit was nothing to do with what the Ploice did.