From BBC News

Lords rule on Lotto rapist victim

A victim of millionaire rapist Iorworth Hoare is due to find out whether she has won her 20-year fight for compensation from her attacker.

Previously lawyers for the woman, known as Mrs A, said they were optimistic the House of Lords would make a landmark ruling in favour of her appeal.

Hoare, 53, was jailed for life in May 1989 for the attempted rape of Mrs A in Roundhay Park, Leeds.

That's the first thing that's not fair: people who are jailed for life should stay in jail until they are dead. For some crimes (such as murder, repeated rape offences etc) rehabilitation and release are not appropriate. It shouldn't matter whether a person is later judged to be no longer a danger to society, because the crimes they have committed in the past are so bad that they require ongoing punishment (lack of liberty) as a deterrent to others and as a reassurance to the rest of society that life and personal safety are of value. If life meant life, the capital punishment lobby would be deprived of one of its arguments. Of course, the crappy government might have to build more prisons...

He won £7m when he bought a lottery ticket while on day release from jail.

Hoare was also jailed several times for a string of sex attacks, including rape, two attempted rapes and three indecent assaults, during the 1970s and 1980s.

He now lives in a £700,000 mansion in Ponteland, Northumberland.

Historic claims

In 2005, a High Court judge ruled that a compensation claim by Mrs A was outside the legal six-year limit. The Appeal Court upheld that decision.

The Law Lords have been examining whether it is fair to preclude claims six years after an attack, or, in child abuse cases, more than six years after the victim reaches 18.

A ruling in favour of Mrs A could pave the way for thousands of actions by victims of sex abuse to make historic claims against their attackers, some dating back many years.

Mrs A was awarded £5,000 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board after she was attacked by Hoare in 1988.

She was ordered to pay his legal fees after unsuccessful attempts to bring a case for compensation in the High Court and Court of Appeal.

This doesn't sound very fair either. This case is of importance to the whole legal system and our democracy, so it's pretty rough on her that she's supposed to then give money to her millionaire near-rapist.

However, the whole idea of being able to claim at any time isn't a good one, I think. Again, if life meant life, maybe Mrs A wouldn't be looking for compensation, since she says in The Times:

“I decided to take this claim forward in order to fight for justice for myself but, far more importantly, for others who will also face similar injustice in the face of an unfair and out-of-date legal statute.”

Although it seems odd that Mrs A only decided to seek compensation when she heard of his lottery win. The Times goes on to say:

Mrs A still suffers nightmares. Now in her late 70s, Mrs A has said that the brutality of the attack destroyed her confidence and left her with lasting psychiatric injury.

A time limit on compensation claims is good for the victim as well as the perpetrator. I don't see how money can bring closure to anyone. Yes, it must be gutting for Mrs A to see the scum who attacked her luxuriating in his mansion, but how will any amount of money change what happened to her? How can money make her feel better?

It's like we tell children: life isn't fair. Holding on to the past is no way to have a happy future. Money isn't the be-all and end-all, and it's certainly no substitute for real justice: which would be Hoare in jail until he's dead, and Mrs A moving on with her life and not letting him affect it any longer.