What’s worse?

$500,000 for a year of harassment is not bad work if you can get it.

To be drugged & raped or sexually harassed?

I don’t usually like comparing one Court’s decision with another, as every case is different and stands on its own merits. But when I saw these two different stories on the one ABC Online page, I couldn’t help but ask that question we hear (all too often) from the knee-jerkers calling in to talk-back radio and on some of the more reactionary websites: “Where’s the justice?” 

You might have heard about the first one, ‘Huge payout for sexual harassment victim’  involving a former building consultant for a prominent Adelaide housing company, Malgorzata Poniatowska, who was awarded close to $500,000 in damages for sexual harassment. It’s the highest such award ever made in Australia.

Ms Poniatowska claimed she was sacked because she had complained about the sexual harassment, which took place in 2005 and consisted of text messages and innuendos, so she sued her former employer and several staff members. The Judge found that two employees sexually harassed Ms Poniatowska and awarded her $466,000 plus legal costs (of about $1.5 million, I believe).

I don’t want to make light of sleazebags who show no respect for women but, if the harassment amounted to only remarks & texting, then the amount she received in compensation looks incredibly out of whack. In fact I think you’d find a lot of people would gladly ‘endure’ 12 months of such behaviour for half a million bucks. I would, but I’m not female.

But it’s when you contrast it to this other case that you really have to wonder about the respective decisions:

Woman raped by nurse awarded $40,ooo

The woman, who was 27 years old at the time and cannot be named for legal reasons, went to the Beenleigh Medeco Medical Centre in Brisbane in September 2007 to seek pain relief for a severe migraine.

As she was a first-time patient, the doctor refused to prescribe morphine, but instructed registered nurse Nicholas Allan Carroll, 45, of Hillcrest, south of Brisbane, to administer different painkillers.

Carroll did so, but later ignored the doctor’s instructions by returning with a second injection, this time containing morphine. He then forced the applicant to perform oral sex on him.

Carroll pleaded guilty to one count each of rape and supplying a dangerous drug and was sentenced to five years’ jail in July 2008. Carroll admitted he knew what he had done was wrong, but that he told the woman the reason he had done it was “You’re pretty and I’m weak.”

In a claim for criminal compensation filed in the Queensland Supreme Court, the woman said the offence had a “devastating” effect on her life. “She was frequently washing out her mouth and washing her hands in response to traumatic memories of the assault,” the judgment read.

The judgment also said the woman suffered agoraphobia, depression, panic attacks and depersonalisation and a long relationship with her boyfriend came to an end as a result. The Supreme Court ordered Carroll pay $41,250 in criminal compensation to the woman.

Comment:

I can only conclude that in the first case the Judge saw a wealthy respondent and made them pay, whereas in the rape case the cretin probably had no money. It was also a claim under the ’Criminal Compensation Act’, which may have restricted the amount. But should an offender’s financial position and/or an out-of-date Act determine the size of the damages awarded against him or her? Surely the pittance awarded to the rape victim was not only an insult but may well traumatise her further, so why not award her $1 million, even if the guy can’t pay it? She needed some closure of the wrong done to her but all she achieved was to have it trivialised.

As for the sexual harassment case, there’s no suggestion she was even touched, although I believe the ‘texts’ included pornographic images. But if courts are going to award those amounts for sleazy remarks & dirty pictures, you might find some people deliberately deciding to become victims as a smart career move.

PS: I should add that, even though it’s not mentioned in the ABC article, the rape victim may also be suing the medical centre. I hope so. In fact I hope she gets $millions.