A personal injury sheriff determined that a woman was raped by a man she met on a night out in Dundee. As a result, the woman was awarded £119,250 in damages. 
The purser stated that she did not consent to sexual intercourse with the defender, Sean Diamond. The defender had previously been acquitted of the charges in the criminal court. However, the pursuer sought damages in the civil court in relation to loss of her employability and solatium. 
In July 2015 the pursuer travelled to Dundee to meet with her friends. They went to a night club and were invited to join the defender and his friend. The four individuals then returned to the pursuers’ friends flat. The pursuer went to sleep on the sofa. At around 3:30am-4:00am the pursuer woke to find the defender sexually penetrating her. She asked him to stop and told him to get off; however, he did not do so. 
After the incident she lost consciousness again and when she later woke she had pain in her vagina and anus. An expert witness, Dr Tagg, explained that the pursuers loss of consciousness was a form of disassociation. Once the pursuer gained consciousness the defender and his friends were asked to leave. The police were contacted thereafter. 
The case was heard in Edinburgh High Court and the jury acquitted the defender of rape. The defender accepted that sexual activity had occurred. However, stated that the pursuer had not indicated that she did not consent and he had a reasonable belief in consent for her actions. His position was that she had not lost consciousness until after the intercourse. 
After this incident the pursuer struggled with symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and she attempted to take her own life in 2016. The pursuer was unable to retain employment at the level she had previously. She applied to join the Police Service of Scotland but was not signed off as mentally fit. 
In giving her evidence the pursuer stated that she wanted justice for the incident and that she had been let down by the criminal system. Counsel moved for damages of £100,000 in relation to solatium and loss of employability. 
In providing the decision of the court, sheriff Campbell stated:  “None of the four main witnesses in this case is wholly reliable. That is not surprising, as they were recalling events which took place six years ago, in a setting where all had been drinking alcohol over a period of several hours. Nonetheless, I formed the impression that the pursuer, Stacey Robertson and Ashley Higgs were generally doing their best to tell the truth, so far as they could recall events.”
In considering the defenders evidence he said: “I do not accept the defender’s version of what happened in the living room. It is a radically different account of events from that given by the pursuer. It does not account for the pursuer’s evidence of apparent loss of consciousness, now attributed to a dissociative state, which is something which the pursuer led evidence from Dr Tagg to explain in clinical terms.”
He continued: “The defender accepted there was no discussion between him and the pursuer about having sex. The defender’s case is that he had a reasonable belief that she consented to sexual intercourse. He said in evidence he thought they were going to sleep together because of the way they were together. I infer that to be a reference to their interactions in the club earlier in the evening. I do not accept that is sufficient to indicate consent to sexual intercourse.”
As a result, the sheriff was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the defender had raped the pursuer. The sheriff then granted decree for the amount of £119,250, plus expenses.