Victims of the serial sex attacker John Worboys have welcomed the overturning of the Parole Board’s decision to release him but said they still feel “let down” by the criminal justice system.

The unprecedented legal challenge, brought by two unnamed women and their lawyers, has highlighted multiple failures in the way the case was dealt with by police, prosecutors and other government agencies.

One of the victims who brought the high court challenge and can only be identified as DSD, was raped in 2003 by Worboys. Officers failed to act on her complaint and no charges were ever brought.



Along with another victim, DSD won a claim for compensation from the Metropolitan police after the supreme court ruled that the force had failed to carry out an effective investigation into the serial sex attacker.

“It is the whole system that has failed,” she said following the high court judgment. “I feel like I have been let down at every step. It is wrong that we have been put in this situation.



“As victims we should have been supported and not having to fight every step of the way in court.” Her legal challenge was not paid for by legal aid but through a crowdfunding website, CrowdJustice.

“One of the reasons I am doing this,” DSD said, “is to give women the confidence that they can come forward and it will be dealt with. I wouldn’t want another woman to go through what I have been through the past 10 to 15 years. I want women to be able to go to the police, report a crime and have it dealt with adequately.”

DSD said she was “absolutely thrilled” with the ruling that the Parole Board must reconsider its decision to release Worboys, but she still wants him to be prosecuted over her allegations. She was confident the Parole Board would reach the right decision when it reconsiders his case.

Timeline John Worboys case Show Victim one drugged by Worboys When she comes to, the victim finds Worboys attempting to put his hand inside her underwear. She reports it to the police Victim two drugged Remembers nothing more Victim three given a drugged drink which she rejects She escapes without being assaulted Victim four drugged Remembers Worboys kissing her, but nothing more. The following day her legs are bruised Victim five drugged Remembers nothing more Victim six claimed she was drugged, but insisted on being taken home without being assaulted. Worboys was found not guilty of administering a drug with intent Victim seven picked up later the same evening. Drugged and sexually assaulted while unconscious, finding her tampon missing the following day. She reports it to the police Worboys arrested Worboys arrested after his cab's licence plate was identified on CCTV from the building where victim seven lived. Released on police bail and no further action is taken Case dropped against Worboys Victim eight drugged and raped She reports the attack to police Victim nine drugged and sexually assaulted She reports the attack to police Victim 10 claimed she was drugged Worboys was found not guilty of administering a drug with intent Victim 11 drugged Remembers finding her skirt pushed to her waist. Later discovers from police that she had been forcibly penetrated with a vibrator Victim 12 drugged and almost certainly raped She goes to the police Victim 13 drugged Victim 14 drugged The court heard she lost a wristband which was later found at Worboys' home. Worboys arrested at 10am on suspicion of repeated sexual assaults Worboys charged with offences against six women Total later rises to 14 as more victims come forward

The other anonymous victim, known as NBV, who was attacked in 2007, said she felt compelled to hold the authorities to account again. She and DSD have already won a protracted compensation claim against the Metropolitan police over their failure to conduct an effective investigation into Worboys.



“The constant reminders in the news have been distressing and made me want to hide,” NBV said. “News that we have won this case finally brought huge relief. I can get on with my life again without looking over my shoulder.”

Phillippa Kaufmann QC, who represented the women, said the case showed how under-resourced the Parole Board was. Photograph: Rick Findler/PA

Harriet Wistrich, the solicitor who represented the two unnamed victims, said she has been contacted by “in excess of 10 women” in the last three months who claimed to have been attacked by Worboys.

Details have been passed to the police, who are investigating fresh allegations. The Crown Prosecution Service has said it will not prosecute him for any of the claims it has already considered.

Wistrich said the CPS “misled” the court by claiming in January that certain allegations did not “meet the evidential threshold” for bringing charges. The reason given at the time of the trial for the relatively small number of charges, she pointed out, was that Worboys was being prosecuted on the basis that they were a “sample” of his crimes.

Kim Harrison, of the law firm Slater and Gordon, which represents 11 victims, said it was “delighted and deeply relieved” by the decision. “We have said all along that Worboys is a manipulative and calculating individual who conned the Parole Board into granting his release,” she said.



“Our clients, who have been terrified that he will track them down after his release, can now sleep easy in their beds safe in the knowledge that this serial sex offender will be kept in jail where he belongs.”

Q&A What is the Parole Board? Show The Parole Board is an independent body that carries out risk assessments on prisoners to determine whether they can be safely released into the community. It manages the early release of prisoners serving fixed-length sentences of four years or more; the release of prisoners who are serving life sentences or indeterminate sentences for public protection; and the re-release of prisoners who have been given life or indeterminate sentences and were then re-imprisoned.

Some prisoners seeking release may have to attend a hearing before Parole Board members. Up to three members of a panel will decide whether to release the prisoner based on a file of documents including information on the inmate’s behaviour in prison, their plans once released and risk of committing further crimes. Medical, psychiatric and psychological evidence can also be heard. As well as the prisoner, a solicitor, psychologist and witnesses could attend. The victim of the prisoner’s offences may also be present. The Parole Board has 234 members who make the assessments and decisions and employs 120 members of staff to support them.

Phillippa Kaufmann QC, who represented the women, denied that the case would “open the floodgates” for victims to challenge Parole Board decisions on prisoner release. Worboys’ case was “exceptional” because the sex offender was charged with only a sample of crimes despite there being“unusually strong” evidence that he was responsible for “wider offending”.

Kaufmann added: “One of the things that’s so striking is just how under-resourced the Parole Board has become ... There’s a dearth of judges sitting on the Parole Board [panels] because there’s not enough sitting in the high court. Gauke [the justice secretary] has a responsibility here.”

More funding was required, she added. “We see what happens when systems are under-resourced. They reach a point where they can’t do a good enough job.”

Rachel Krys, the co-director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said: “The women in this case should have been listened to from the outset – when they reported to police, when decisions were taken regarding prosecution and when parole was considered. Instead two women have had to crowdfund to get us here. We need an urgent review of the Parole Board’s decision-making processes regarding sex offenders.”



