Crime :Sexual Offences Revision nots

Sexual offences: Revision

Sexual offences act 2003

§  The law relating to sexual offences was codified by the SEXAUL OFFENCES ACT 2003 -> however didn’t bring all sexual offences under one umbrella.

§  act was intended to modernize the law of sexual offences and bring it more closely into line with contemporary attitudes. "archaic, incoherent and discriminatory"- Lord Falcon L.C.

§  create gender neutral offences (apart from ****)- equality and prevents discrimination

§  clear up laws concerning consent 

****

S,1 of SOA 2003 provides the new definition of ****-  changes the mens rea to involve lack of of a reasonable belief in consent.

MAXIUM FOR **** IS LIFE - no matter where the penetration-  Ismail (2005)

Offence: " a person commits offence if

·         he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of a person with his penis

·         B does not consent to the penetration

·         A does not reasonably believe that a consents"

ACTUS REUS

MENS REA

1.A PERSON

INTEND TO PENTRATE

2.WHO PENETRATES WITH HIS PENIS

3.THE VAGINA , ANUS OR MOUTH OF A VICTIM

NOT REASONABY BELIEVE THAT VICTIM CONSENTED TO PENTRATION

4.WHO DOES NOT CONSENT TO THE PENTRATION

        Actus Reus

A PERSON:  can only be committed by men (penile penetration) also includes surgically constructed penis. PENTRATION:  of V includes surgically constructed vagina (- making law less discriminatory) - SOA 2003 s .79 (2)  -  mouth and anus. However does not mention degree of penetration. S.79 (2)- penetration is continuing act from entry to withdrawal. If d continues to penetrates during sex after v removes consent - still ****.   how much time d has to withdraw is unclear- parliament on passing act stated that 'reasonable time' - 'reasonable' decided by jury = inconsistency. ABSENCE OF CONSENT:  consent is not just isolated to **** but all sexual offences. definition of consent is in s. 74 . evidential and conclusive in s 75 & 76.

Mens Rea

-reference to reasonable belief in consent overrules  DPP v Morgan (1976)  in context of ****- so D can no longer assert lack of mens rea because, being unreasonable believed victim consented.

Commentary

one change was **** now includes forced oral penetration with penis, which used to be prosecuted as indecent assault- failed to indicate seriousness of wrongness- home office  oral penetration was 'as horrible , as demanding and as traumatizing as other  forms of forced penile penetration'. - the fact that penetration was with the penis oral penetration deserved to be classified as ****- and does deserve the maximum life sentence- even though penetration with by objects was also an extremely serious violation .

prosecution must prove that there was penile penetration and it was intentional- penetration is a continuing act from entry to withdrawal S. 79 (2) - means that during consensual sex offence can be committed once consent is removed and pen continues. 

Absence of consent is key and…