Jay Jones Criminal Injuries Compensation Claim

Jay Jones, 3 years old was attacked by another 3 year old with a car jack. Both were apparently inside the attacker’s parent’s car while the parents were loading things into the boot.

Jay was struck 11 times with the car jack causing nasty injuries and the severity of the attack was such that the car windscreen was cracked. Apparently it was the cracked windscreen which alerted the attacker’s parents to what was happening, not the attack itself or Jay’s screams.

The attack occurred several years ago and according to newspaper reports the attacker has since been taken into care.

Jay’s parents submitted a claim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority for damages for Jay’s injuries on the grounds that he had been the victim of a crime. CICA initially rejected the application on the grounds that, under English Law, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is 10 years and the attacker was well below that age. If he could not be criminally responsible for his actions then no crime had been committed.

CICA have been persuaded to change their minds. Details of the decision are emerging slowly but it would seem that Jay’s parents argued Jay had been the victim of a deliberate act which would have constituted a crime had it not been for the attacker’s age. What is not yet clear is the extent to which CICA accepted that argument or whether the decision was on other grounds.

Only time will tell whether this decision has opened the door to compensation for the injured victims of “crimes” committed by attackers under the age of 10, or whether this decision was purely on the facts of this one case. Certainly the attack was serious, the injuries and their aftermath have had a significant effect on Jay and some of the comments attributed to CICA on this decision suggest that they may yet try and differentiate this case from others which may be brought in the future.

The danger, of course, is the uncertainty which may follow from this decision – where might a line be drawn in relation to, for example, the severity of the attack or it’s consequences. Is the attacker’s age totally irrelevant from now on so that, for example, even an attack by a 1 year old might lead to compensation? How does this decision sit with other requirements of the CICA – for example the requirement to promptly report the “crime” to the Police and to cooperate with their investigation. Will there be a spate of reports to the Police in the future of “attacks” by toddlers. 

For further information about compensation for criminal injuries, contact Neille Ryan, Partner specialising in peronsal injury compensation claims and visit our web page Criminal Injuries Compensation.