Barmaid gets $74,000 after assault, robbery
21.02.1998
By: OBERHARDT M Source: QNP
A FEMALE bar attendant, sexually assaulted during an armed robbery, was awarded the maximum $74,000 in criminal compensation yesterday.
The case was watched closely because it again highlighted whether a victim of crime could be awarded more than $20,000 for nervous shock if they suffered no major physical injury.
The woman, 37, was working at a Brisbane golf club when three masked men burst into the bar with a shotgun on October 1, 1995.
She was ordered to fill a bag with money from the till and then asked where the keys to the safe were hidden.
When she could not answer, one robber dragged her into the male toilets and ordered her to strip.
The robber tore off her underwear and then sexually assaulted her while looking for the keys he believed she had hidden on her body.
The keys could not be found and the woman was left naked and terrified in the toilets.
She was found later by club staff and patrons.
She suffered bruising and had difficulty walking properly for several days but suffered no other major physical injury.
However, her solicitor Tony Bailey maintained she had suffered a severe mental injury because of the attack.
District Court Judge Eric Pratt ordered two of the robbers, Kevin Steven Ginger and Craig Raymond Armstrong, each pay the woman $20,000 for nervous shock.
He awarded her a further $34,050 for pain and suffering and loss of amenities although he indicated had he been able he would have given an extra $40,000.
Judge Pratt said because of the law at the time of the offence he could only award the maximum allowed of $74,050 rather than a total of $80,000.
Ginger, 31, and Armstrong, 25, were sentenced last year to lengthy jail terms for a series of armed robberies including the golf club hold up.
Judge Pratt said he was satisfied that Ginger was the robber who had actually assaulted the woman.
He said Armstrong and the other robber (who is yet to be found) were equally to blame because Ginger's actions were clearly contemplated in the lead up to the operation.
``The woman was terrorised and traumatised in a most cruel and vile way by these villains who seemed to think she had a key hidden upon her body,'' he said.
Judge Pratt said he was satisfied the woman had suffered a major depression which had impaired her by 30 to 40 percent psychologically.
He said he wanted to make it clear his award was only for the woman's injuries and made no allowance for loss of earnings or medical costs.
``It has caused a massive loss of her enjoyment of life,'' he added.
Mr Bailey told the court it had been a particularly nasty attack which had great consequences for the woman.
He said he intended to pursue the men to ensure they paid the compensation.
