Alleged rape victim awarded £15k over PSNI failings
- Published
A vulnerable alleged rape victim is to be awarded £15,000 for failings in the PSNI investigation into her complaint, a High Court judge has ruled.
Mr Justice McAlinden held that the woman's human rights were breached by the operational and systemic shortcomings identified.
The woman - referred to as C in court proceedings - is in her 30s and has Asperger's syndrome,
She reported being raped by a man during a night out in June 2007.
A decision was subsequently taken not to prosecute her alleged attacker, who maintained any activity was consensual.
But in the first lawsuit of its kind in Northern Ireland, the woman sued the police over its handling of the investigation.
Psychiatric injuries
She claimed the flawed investigation violated her entitlement to freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Her lawyers argued that she went on to suffer distress, psychiatric injuries, depression, psychotic symptoms and an eating disorder.
The court heard police only interviewed C six months after the date of the alleged attack.
Following the no prosecution decision, her family lodged a complaint with the Police Ombudsman.
In 2009, the watchdog recommended at least two police officers be subjected to disciplinary sanctions over the handling of the case.
The Ombudsman concluded that the PSNI probe did not meet the basic principles of investigation.
He also found:
- Officers initially visited the location of the suspected sex attack, but did not seize any possible CCTV footage or conduct house to house inquiries for further witnesses.
- No initial statements were taken from those who were with the woman on the night in question, or from anyone in the taxi firm she used to get home.
The chief constable at the time, Sir Hugh Orde, wrote to the woman's family stating that she had suffered an "horrendous attack" and offered an apology.
Since then new guidelines have been produced and a specialist rape crime unit introduced.
Ruling on the action, Mr Justice McAlinden found the woman had been the victim of a serious sexual assault where no consent was given.
He identified a delay in conducting and achieving best evidence interview, adding that a number of the Ombudsman's criticisms of the police investigation were justified.
"The operational failings in this case cannot be described as minor or insignificant," the judge said.
"These failings occurred against a background of systemic shortcomings in relation to training."
He went on: "I have no hesitation in making a declaration that the plaintiff's Article 3 rights were breached by reason of the failings in the defendant's investigation into her complaint of rape."
Mr Justice McAlinden held that C would have experienced some upset and frustration at the shortcomings.
But he concluded that her severe psychiatric and psychological deterioration would still have occurred even if the police probe had been flawless.
He confirmed: "I consider that the appropriate award of damages in this case is the sum of £15,000."