Site Meter

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Lotto rapist forced to pay compensation to victim

Lotto rapist forced to pay compensation to victim



A convicted rapist who won £7 million on the lottery while in prison has been forced to pay compensation to an elderly victim in a landmark legal settlement.

After a four-year court battle, Iorworth Hoare agreed to pay close to £100,000 to the 79-year-old retired teacher he attempted to rape 21 years ago. His bill for legal fees reached almost £1million.

Hoare, known as the "Lotto rapist", may now face claims from some of the other women he assaulted, which could cost him at least half his remaining fortune.

The settlement is the first of its kind in this country and also opens the door for thousands of other sex abuse victims to make compensation claims many years after they were attacked.


I fail to see the link between his Lotto win and his conduct 20 years earlier, for which he has already served a life sentence and she received financial compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.

As has been observed in Contrasts in Tolerance, in the UK they like to punish you once, then twice, then three times, and then four times...

3 comments:

richard said...

I'm afraid I have always had a rather cynical attitude towards compensation claims in situations where no financial loss was involved or costs incurred as a result. It gives me the distinct impression of putting a price on the suffering and trying to "see what can be squeezed out of a sorry situation".

As for in some way trying to twist a lottery win years after into somehow being an "injustice" against his former victim, the very idea is preposterous. He's paid the price society imposed for his crime. That should be it. Full stop.

Anonymous said...

No, richard. You are wrong. His legs should be twisted off in an unfortunate accident and his nuts should be twanged up high on a washing line... (oh fuck, I can't go on with this...)

richard said...

Well Harry, right or wrong, if "colour TV, three square meals and free acess to a Gym" was the price that society asked him to pay then it is hardly his fault is it? Any anger should probably be vented towards the system that you seem to think got it wrong when it sentenced him first time around.

Justice needs to be logical and consisten not a series of visceral knee jerks.