Consent evaluation Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Explicit consent

A

Explicitly orally or in writing saying that the acts are ok

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Implied consent

A

Implying through conduct that consent has been given

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

True consent

A

The defendant having full knowledge of the acts of the defendant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Tabbassum

A

V’s Didn’t have true consent
they believed that D was examining them for breast cancer research however he was merely doing it for his own perverted desires

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Valid consent

A

referring to the legal capacity of the victims

  • of legal age to consent
  • mentally capable of consenting
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Burrell v Harmer

A

D’s were underage and therefore could not consent to getting a tattoo

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

When can the defence of consent be used

A
  • criminal acts outlined under Section 47 and section 20 of the OAPA
  • NOT ALLOWED FOR section 18
  • Allowed in unlawful act manslaughter cases (Slingsby)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What are Lord Lanes exceptions

A
  • horseplay
  • chastisement
  • vigorous sexual activity
  • emergency medical intervention
  • piercings and tattoos
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Evaluation point 1 - True consent

A

Consideration of need for legal capacity to consent

  • protects vulnerable members of society
  • protection of children
  • protection of mentally disabled
  • protection of the public
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Evaluation point - True consent extension

A

Protects people who are fraudulently deceived into consenting
- Tabassum

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Evaluation - inconsistency in sentencing

A

R v Brown - gay sadomachist acts were done and they were convicted under OAPA
R v Wilson- straight partners branded each other defence was allowed
CONSENT IN BOTH
- allows for the implication of the courts personal bias = unjust
- need of reform to meet progressive modern standards

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Evaluation - Lord Lanes exceptions

A

Allowance for horseplay is unfair
R v Aikten - V was set alight and permanent burns to vast majority of his body however Ds could argue consent due to Lord Lanes exceptions
- lack of protection for victims and therefore in need of reform to create a just criminal system

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Evaluation point - emergency medical intervention

A

Great thing
-Prevents doctors from being sued for just trying to do the best for their patients
- If this wasn’t allowed it would act as a deterrent for the medical field
-

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly