| Author |
Message |
|
pcernie
Legend
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
|
  | | | | Quote: A man is suing his mother over her alleged failure to protect him from his father's beatings.
The 32-year-old County Durham man, who cannot be identified, told the High Court in London that his mother, now in her late 60s, assaulted him herself.
He claimed that she aided and abetted daily punishment by her husband by reporting his wrongdoings.
His mother denied liability and has claimed the case was brought outside the legal time limit.
The man, who was brought up in west London, claimed he was assaulted up to four times a day between the ages of five and 19 by the father he called a "tormentor".
He said he was hit with a stick, belt, electrical lead or wooden brush until he was 16 and struck with an open hand and throttled or choked as he got older.
'Reasonable chastisement'
His mother said her son was "exaggerating".
She did agree that she slapped him occasionally but said it was "reasonable chastisement" and denied hitting him with a clothes brush.
The son said in court: "I saw that she did not like me and it led me to think that her primary concern in seeking help was to make her home life run more smoothly and not the welfare of myself or my siblings.
"I wouldn't say my mother had done her best to protect me. I always felt she could have done more.
"She wasn't a tormentor like my father was, continually looking for excuses to assault me.
"For the best part of it she was herself fairly harmless."
The man is seeking damages for pain and suffering as well as £7,800 to pay for therapy.
He claimed he first consulted a solicitor 10 years ago but did not take action as he found ordinary life a struggle. | | | | |
I can't wait to see how this turns out... would this case be somewhat unique in terms of the alleged victim accusing the mother of not doing enough to protect him?  _________________Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/
|
| Tue May 25, 2010 9:08 pm |
|
|
|
belchingmatt
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 3:16 am
Posts: 6146
Location: Middle Earth
|
So she has just come into some money then by the sounds of it.
_________________
Dive like a fish, drink like a fish!
><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
If one is diving so close to the limits that +/- 1% will make a difference then the error has already been made.
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 7:29 am |
|
|
|
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
How on earth does he intend to prove this twenty years later?
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 9:31 am |
|
|
|
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
No that would be a reasonable case. She should have done as much as possible to protect him, though the kid could have been a right tearaway and deserved them all. In that case she has nothing to fear. If he was beaten by the father without cause then yes she should have intervened owing a duty of care, but now is too late. I can only assume that the father has died and so cant be sued. It is the same basis that a person can sue the police because they stood around because they failed in their duty of care. _________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 11:05 am |
|
|
|
Zippy
Spends far too much time on here
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:20 pm
Posts: 3838
Location: Here Abouts
|
I wonder what the statute of limitations is for this kind of thing?
_________________The Official "Saucy Minx"  This above all: To Thine Own Self Be True "Red sky at night, Shepherds Delight"..Which is a bit like Shepherds Pie, but with whipped topping instead of mashed potato.
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 11:08 am |
|
|
|
rustybucket
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 5836
|
I heartily suspect that this case is less about proof and more about this man finally having his say and being listened to. _________________Jim
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 1:49 pm |
|
|
|
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
For a minor up till the age of 21. _________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 5:20 pm |
|
|
|
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
|
For civil cases it's usually six years (Limitation Act 1980), though the Court can decide to still hear the case (usually where there are mitigating circumstances). http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/ ... 00058_en_1
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 7:25 pm |
|
|
|
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
But without evidence, who'll listen to him? My initial thought was the same as belchingmatt's. Somebody looking for cash or has a grudge for some other reason.
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 7:28 pm |
|
|
|
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
|
With it being a civil case, he doesn't necessarily have to "prove" anything - the case will be decided on the "balance of probabilities", so all he has to do is convince the Court it happened - it'll virtually be down to simply whether they believe him, or his parents.
|
| Wed May 26, 2010 7:35 pm |
|
|
