Sexual Offences

Question 0

Jheeta (2007)

Answer 0

D texted V purporting to be a police officer, induced her into having sex with him, held that there was no consent as V didn’t agree by choice with the freedom and capacity to make that decision.

Question 1

B (2006)

Answer 1

D was accused of rape, did not disclose HIV positive status to partner, held: consent not vitiated by the HIV

Question 2

Bree (2007)

Answer 2

Intoxicated consent - held that question of capacity is distinct from impaired inhibitions, poor recollection of events or irresponsible behaviour, questions to ask; was she capable of making up her own mind, what was the state of understanding and did she have the capacity to exercise judgement?

Question 3

Tabassum (2000)

Answer 3

D purported to be conducting breast examinations on women for medical reasons, was lying, conclusive presumption applied so there was no consent.

Question 4

Donald (Stephen) (2008)

Answer 4

D pretended to be his teenage daughter to induce V into engaging in sexual activity on webcam, conclusive presumption applied, no consent.

Question 5

R v H (2005)

Answer 5

D seized hold of the back pocket of V’s trousers, she broke away, D’s act was not unambiguously sexual so his purpose and the circumstances must be considered.

Question 6

George (1956)

Answer 6

D removed shoes from womens’ feet because he found it sexually gratifying, jury had to look at purpose and circumstances of act to decide if it was sexual.

Question 7

Court (1988)

Answer 7

Shop assistant pulled 12 year old girl onto lap and spanked her, may have been sexual so D’s purpose and the circumstances had to be considered.