Sexual Offences Flashcards
Ashworth’s 7 objectives of the Sexual offences act 2003
- Bring law in line with modern issues
- Create gender-neutral offences
- Improve clarity
- Clarify the meaning of consent
- Protect the most vulnerable
- Ensure that penalties reflect seriousness
- Improve conviction rates in rape cases
Sexual offences amendment act 1976
Rape: Old Law
A man must have unlawful intercourse with a woman without consent
Unlawful essentially meant extra-marital
R v R
Made marital rape unlawful
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
Rape: Old Law
codified R v R
Ensured D’s who claim they were brought up in another country where marital rape is lawful have no defence
A [2012]
Rape
D’s who claim they were brought up in another country where marital rape is lawful have no defence- rule still exists under 2003 legislation
Cogan
Rape: Penetration by a penis
D was convicted as a secondary party at a time when in law he could not have been principle offender
In modern law this can be extended to women who otherwise engage in the act
Sexual Offences Act 1956
Rape: Old law
Mens rea requirement was about intent or recklessness
Morgan
Rape: Old Law
Mens Rea
Trial judge tried to introduce objective concept of reasonable grounds for belief the V was consenting.
However this was rejected as logically inconsistent with the current mens rea
R v B
Rape: Actus Reus
D had serious delusions due to paranoid schizophrenia, insisted on sex with his partner and she, having said no, submitted.
CA said the jury could not consider if his reasonable belief included his paranoia
Acknowledged that the new law deliberately departs from the old subjective model
Doody
Rape: Actus Reus
The judge can point out to the jury that some things they may believe are just myth
R v H
Definition of ‘sexual’
D grabbed woman bum and said ‘fancy a shag’
Because of the place he touched her and his words, this was sexual assault.
Court
Sexual assault: Old Law
Common assault in indecent circumstances
Must be inherently indecent conduct
Grout
Causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent
Sexual activity may extend to sexual conversation
CPS guidance: Causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent
Suggests that female ‘rapists’ be charged with this offence
R v Flattery
s76 Conclusive Presumptions: Deception as to nature
D persuaded naive victim he was performing a surgical operation on her, this was the only reason she submitted
R v Williams
s76 Conclusive Presumptions: Deception as to nature
Singing teacher persuaded V that it was a form of breathing exercise
R v McNally
s76 Conclusive Presumptions: Deception as to nature
Girl posed as a boy on the internet and engaged with another girl. They met up and acts took place between them charged as s.2 assault by penetration.
CA appears to think that this deception as to gender was not a deception as to nature of the act- the issue of s76 was never even raised. BUT it was (later) said that gender goes to the nature of the act
R v Jheeta
s76 Conclusive Presumptions: Deception as to Purpose
V knew she was having intercourse with D, but he had tricked her into believing that the police regarded it as her duty. CA held this could not amount to a deception as to purpose- conclusive presumptions cannot arise merely because the defendant was deceived in some way by lies, these will rarely go into the nature/purpose of intercourse.
Assange
s76 Conclusive Presumptions: Deception as to Purpose
A case where a D lied about his use of a condom would not fall within a conclusive presumption
R v Devonald
s76 Conclusive Presumptions: Deception as to Purpose
Wider interpretation outside rape cases
D had grudge against his daughters ex-boyfriend. Posed as a girl on the internet and got boyfriend to masterbate on camera in order to humiliate him (s.4 Causing another person to engage in a sexual activity without consent case)
Was held this could be a conclusive presumption: The victim thought the act was about sex when actually it was about humiliation, identity.