Are criminal and civil cases pursued differently if the victim is a celebrity?
<p>If a person attacks a famous footballer/soccer player, who is worth millions of dollars, by causing him severe physical damage, and the perpetrator happens to be identified and tried, will this attacker be punished according to penal law only or will they be also sued by the club owning this particular professional player and then face another trial against the club he plays for? I mean, yes, a crime against a person is always a crime and this highly condemnable, but is the thing usually managed differently when the victim is a celebrity?</p>

<p>In general, the perpetrator can be sued by anyone who suffered harm as a result of his actions.  The fact that he's also being prosecuted criminally doesn't change that, nor does it matter whether or not the victim is a "celebrity".</p>

<p>The perpetrator could, for instance, be sued by any or all of:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>the victim himself, for his pain and suffering and loss of earnings</p></li>
<li><p>the victim's club, for the financial loss due to the player not playing</p></li>
<li><p>the victim's medical insurer, for the cost of his care.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>However, even if any of these plaintiffs win their case and are awarded some huge sum of money, it doesn't help them if the perpetrator doesn't have the money.  They can only actually collect what the perpetrator has, and possibly some fraction of his future earnings (which are not likely to be very much if he is in prison).  So unless the perpetrator is quite wealthy, it's unlikely they would go to the trouble and expense of a lawsuit.</p>

civil-law penal-law