WA Criminal Law on Sexual Abuse by Doctors Pre-1992?

[Kay70]

I was sexually abused by my psychiatrist from the age of 16, when I started seeing him for depression.

Last year, he was arrested, but now the DPP say they might have to drop the charges because the law pre-1992 covered teachers and guardians, but not doctors.

Surely there's a criminal law that covers this?

 

[Sophea]

If there was the DPP would know about it.

 

[Iamthelaw]

Do you know happen to know what the actual charge is?

 

[Kay70]

Do you know happen to know what the actual charge is?

Indecent dealing with a child.

 

[Iamthelaw]

I'm not particularly familiar with the provisions in WA - However I wouldn't have thought that an element to that offence is that the accused has to be in a position of trust or authority - It can apply to anyone?

Perhaps some one who is familiar with the provisions in WA could offer there 2 cents? If not, I'll look more into it for you.

 

[Kay70]

I'm not particularly familiar with the provisions in WA - However I wouldn't have thought that an element to that offence is that the accused has to be in a position of trust or authority - It can apply to anyone?

Perhaps some one who is familiar with the provisions in WA could offer there 2 cents? If not, I'll look more into it for you.

It makes sense that abusing a position of power should be considered, and it is now, however pre-1992, it only applied to teachers, guardians, and employers. That's my understanding, anyway.

 

[Iamthelaw]

It makes sense that abusing a position of power should be considered, and it is now, however pre-1992, it only applied to teachers, guardians, and employers. That's my understanding, anyway.

In clarification to my previous post. What I mean is that I would have thought insofar as the requisite elements to prove the offence are concerned; it was not a requirement that an accused must be in a position of trust or authority in order to be guilty of the offence - Not that it should/shouldn't be considered. If your assumption of the provision pre-1992 is accurate - That would mean that a stranger off the street could not be guilty of the offence, provided they weren't a teacher, guardian or employer.

You say that you were aged 16 at the time of the offence - Therefore my guess is that they've brought a charge pursuant to s322 - Maybe when I get a chance in the next couple of days I can look more into it.

 

[Iamthelaw]

Please see image attached - As at 31 May 1991 - s324B. Any person who unlawfully and indecently assaults another person is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for 4 years - They could bring a charge for indecent assault. The penalty may not be as high as for an offence of a person being in a position of trust or authority but it's still better than no charge in your case. From the (very) brief look I had I didn't see any specified offence within that time period relating to persons in a position of trust or authority, hence why it may be an idea for the DPP to bring just an indecent assault charge.

Perhaps some knowledgeable members may have something to add? @Tim W

 

[Kay70]

In clarification to my previous post. What I mean is that I would have thought insofar as the requisite elements to prove the offence are concerned; it was not a requirement that an accused must be in a position of trust or authority in order to be guilty of the offence - Not that it should/shouldn't be considered. If your assumption of the provision pre-1992 is accurate - That would mean that a stranger off the street could not be guilty of the offence, provided they weren't a teacher, guardian or employer.

You say that you were aged 16 at the time of the offence - Therefore my guess is that they've brought a charge pursuant to s322 - Maybe when I get a chance in the next couple of days I can look more into it.

I have no legal background, but my understanding is that if in a (specific) care role, and with the age restrictions, it is illegal under any circumstances. If not in those specific care roles, like a stranger off the street, the issue of consent comes into it. And in a historical case, consent or lack of, is an especially difficult thing to prove.