Sex attackers should declare new wealth, says law chief

By
Daily Mail Reporter

19:30 EST, 20 June 2012

|

19:31 EST, 20 June 2012

Former Solicitor General Vera Baird said victims often had no way of knowing attackers' circumstances had changed

Former Solicitor General Vera Baird said victims often had no way of knowing attackers’ circumstances had changed

A former Solicitor General yesterday called for sexual offenders to be forced to declare significant changes in their financial circumstances to help victims claim compensation from them.

Vera Baird spoke out after the rape victim of £4.5million Lottery winner Edward Putman, 46, revealed she was planning to launch a civil action against him.

The woman, who was 17 at the time of the 1991 attack, only learned about his life-changing win, in 2009, when he was taken to court last week for benefit fraud.

Mrs Baird, who was Solicitor General  from 2007 to 2010, said victims often had no way of knowing attackers’ circumstances had changed. She said: ‘Offenders should have to make a declaration if they suddenly come into money above a certain limit.’

She said making a claim needed to be simplified, adding: ‘There seems to be no ability to go back to the criminal court and ask for compensation years after the event.

‘If someone has to get legal aid to bring a case who they find, by a fluke, has come into money, then that’s quite a big ask of the system at the moment.’

Rape campaigner Jill Saward warned too few victims were aware of the open-ended time-limit for launching civil cases and might miss out on adding to the ‘pitiful’ payouts from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. Putman’s victim received just £4,000.

‘There shouldn’t be a time limit on claims because the consequences of rape don’t have a time limit,’ she said.

Putman’s victim is able to chase compensation because of a change in law secured three years ago by the sex attack victim of another lottery winner, Iorworth Hoare. It swept away a six-year time limit on claims against sexual offenders.

Lottery winner and convicted rapist Iorworth Hoare who paid an undisclosed five-figure sum to his victim

Lottery winner and convicted rapist Iorworth Hoare who paid an undisclosed five-figure sum to his victim

Hoare attacked Shirley Woodman, 83, who waived her anonymity, in 1988.

Mrs Woodman went to court to overturn the law that was preventing her from seeking a share of his win.

The case went all the way to the House of Lords where it was decided judges should have the discretion to extend the time-limit to make a compensation claim in serious assault cases.

He eventually paid an undisclosed five-figure sum in an out-of-court settlement, which Mrs Woodman gave to charity. He also paid an estimated £1million in legal costs.

Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have not been moderated.

What a ridiculous idea! I’ve personally been sexually abused assaulted many years ago, and there is NO WAY I would bring back those awful memories and why would I want to know what my abusers are up to basically stalk them if they have money. Its not about justice anymore its all about money!! Seriously women like this give other women like myself a bad name. Makes me sick!!!

For serious crimes it is a good idea, but all need to remember the continuing expansion of the definitions of crime where expanding feminist law is concerned so this should also apply to false accusers and female abusers who create and use ill-defined feminist law as weapons against men, to require them to declare significant changes in their financial circumstances to help male victims claim compensation from the false accusing females and abusers of ill-defined law.

The most fundamental part of a Justice system is that you can only be tried once for your crime. You serve your debt to society, then rehabilitate and become a fine, upstanding taxpayer. We’re moving further and further away from that in recent years and those who cheerlead have not even begun to think things through.

Here’s a neater solution. Whatever crime has been committed, the criminal is required to pay their victim compensation. This compensation can be a percentage of future earnings or full payment should the said criminal acquire a considerable sum of money.

Why? If they’ve done their time that should be the end of it. I don’t like the idea of a
– Lotte, London (Dutch Expat), 21/6/2012 04:55
They are totally different concepts. The prison is punishment by society for committing a crime. The other is a claim by the victim that they be compensated for the damage suffered. I have no problem with it It should happen more often – assault, drink driving injuries – and people might think twice before deciding to go ahead given the pitiful sentences handed down by courts.

Why just sex crimes ? Typical tunnel vision woman.

Wouldn’t it be better if serious crimes were given mandatory serious prison time instead? If a judge hands out a sentence of life then the guilty person gets life that way victims would get

Why was my comment c3n5or3d? It now makes no sense.

Why? If they’ve done their time that should be the end of it. I don’t like the idea of a

And in light of the circumstances of this sex crime I sentence you to………….
The sentence (whatever it may be)…………………..
Plus a reduction or forfeiture of all financial rewards in the future, from where ever they may be gained…………….
However if you kill them, that would be OK………………….
Does the above sound as rediculous to you as I?

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes