JURISDICTION : CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ASSESSOR OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

ACT : Criminal Injuries compensation Act 2003

LOCATION : PERTH

CITATION : WATSON -v- JOHNSON [2023] WACIC 4

CORAM : C F HOLYOAK-ROBERTS

DELIVERED : 1 JUNE 2023

PUBLISHED : 1 JUNE 2023

FILE NO/S : CIC 291 of 2023

BETWEEN : ALEXANDER WATSON
Applicant

    AND

    ANGELINA TANIA JOHNSON
    Offender

Catchwords:

Proved offence, Scratches to face

Legislation:

Criminal Injuries Compensation 2003, s3, s12, s19

Result:

Compensation awarded

Category: C

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Not applicable
Offender : Not applicable

Solicitors:

Applicant :
Offender :

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

DR v DC [2018] WADC148

C F HOLYOAK-ROBERTS:

Reasons for Decision

1 Alexander Watson (the applicant) who was born on 27 October 1981 made an application on 29 January 2023 for compensation for injuries suffered as a consequence of an offence which occurred on 22 June 2022 at Madora Bay (the offence). On 5 May 2023 I awarded the applicant $500 compensation for injuries suffered as a consequence of the offence. By email dated 8 May 2023 the applicant requested my reasons for decision which are set out below.
2 The application was made pursuant to section 12 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (the Act) which authorises an Assessor to award an applicant compensation if satisfied the claimed injury and any claimed loss occurred as a consequence of the commission of a proved offence which is defined in section 3 of the Act. Angelina Tania Johnson (the offender) entered a plea of guilty to the charge of assault public officer at the Mandurah Magistrates Court on the 22 July 2022 in relation to the offence. As such I was satisfied a proved offence as defined in the Act was constituted.
3 The circumstances of the incident are outlined in the incident report as follows:
On Wednesday the 29th of June 2022 at about 10:20pm we were tasked to an address in Madora Bay for a recovery order for a child.
During the recovery order Monique JOHNSON (mother of the child) and Angelina JOHNSON (Moniques mother) became highly agitated and attempted to prevent the recovery. Angelina grabbed the child whilst in S/C WATSONS arms and began clawing at S/CWATSONs face leaving 7x scratches on the right side of the face, resulting in bleeding.
Monique and Angelina had to be restrained using empty hand tactics to provent (sic) them both from continuing to attack S/C WATSON.
The child was removed and taken from the address unharmed.
4 In support of his application the applicant provided a statement of events and victim impact statement together with fourteen photographs of his injuries. Copies of his medical notes were obtained pursuant to section 19 of the Act from Rockingham Medical Centre where he attended post incident.
5 The photographs depict scratches to the applicant’s face of a superficial nature, one being deeper and longer than the balance of the scratches. The applicant alleged there was scarring left by the scratches but it is difficult to ascertain any scarring in the pictures provided.
6 The medical notes obtained pursuant to section 19 of the Act indicate the applicant first attended his general practitioner on the 5 July 2022 complaining of recent scratches to his face when on duty. He was also worried about an unrelated infection on his arms. Antibiotics were prescribed for the unrelated infection also in the hope they would cover any risk of infection in relation to the scratches the applicant sustained in the incident. He was reviewed on the 8 July 2022 by telehealth and the unrelated skin infection together with the scratches were discussed. By 27 July 2022 he was experiencing no infections related to this incident.
7 In his victim impact statement, the applicant said following the incident he used alcohol sanitiser to clean the wounds to his face. He felt disgusted and dirty and could not sleep at night. He said he was worried over the next few days and weeks he would acquire some sort of infection although it was explained to him he would not require blood tests as his injuries were caused by fingernails and not teeth. He said he suffered disturbed sleep for a number of days and found himself becoming short tempered. He was mocked for the injuries to his face by his colleagues and other criminals (which is non-compensable) and felt frustrated. I have no evidence the applicant’s psychological symptoms were long term nor that he sought any treatment for it.
8 Having regard to the evidence I was satisfied the applicant suffered physical injury as a result of the incident. In relation to any psychological sequelae, to award compensation for mental and nervous shock pursuant to section 35 of the Act, I must be satisfied the symptoms are of an enduring character so as to amount to an injury in legal sense and common parlance as opposed to a mere emotional reaction (DR v DC [2018] WADC148). I accept the applicant experienced psychological symptomology as a consequence of the incident but on the information available to me I was not satisfied the symptomology was of an enduring character. I therefore declined to award compensation for the psychological component of the claim.
9 On the evidence available to me the applicant’s physical injury resolved by 8 July 2022 although his injury was discussed when he presented on two subsequent occasions for an unrelated infection. Therefore, on the information available to me I assessed the applicant’s injury at $500.
10 The applicant made no claim for any losses and therefore no award was made in relation to those items.

I certify that the preceding paragraph(s) comprise the reasons for decision of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Assessor of Western Australia.

C F Holyoak-Roberts, CHIEF ASSESSOR OF CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION

4 JULY 2023