Exam (elaborations)
Sexual Offences - Case Summaries
- Course
- Institution
- Book
Extensive list of case summaries that will cut back your reading and note taking by weeks. Manageable summaries, no more trawling through 100 page judgements
[Show more]
Connected book
Book Title:
Author(s):
- Edition:
- ISBN:
- Edition:
More summaries for
-
Criminal Law Lecture Notes
-
Should the law be doing more to protect drunk women? (R v Bree 2007)
-
Advanced Criminal Law Exam Notes (First Class)
Seller
Follow
rachelgrantlawandcriminology
Reviews received
Content preview
Sexual Offences CasesSection 1 – Rape Cases
Cases relevant to s.76
Williams (1923)
a singing teacher deceived his 16-year-old student into having sexual intercourse telling
her it was a procedure to improve her singing voice. D was charged with rape.
D did not understand the dynamics of sexual intercourse so the court could find deception
as to the nature of the act.
Dica (2004)
D, knowing he was HIV positive had unprotected sexual intercourse with two victims,
infecting both. Neither victims knew of D’s positive status when they consented.
Court ruled: guilty of offence against the person not rape.
Court of Appeal: allowed an appeal but the court clarified that a lack of knowledge about
D’s infection did not amount to deception as to the nature of the act. There was no rape.
Linekar (1995)
D had sexual intercourse with a prostitute (V) having promised to pay her £25. D never
intended to pay her. D was charged with rape on the basis that V would not have
consented had she knew D was not going to pay her.
Initially D was convicted of rape, but on appeal it was determined that consent was not
negated by D’s deception.
The Court of Appeal recognised V would not have consented without payment promise,
but held that consent remained effective as she was not deceived as to the nature of the
act (she knew D would penetrate her vagina) or the purpose of D doing so (for his sexual
gratification.)
Devonald (2008)
V (16 year old boy) was in a relationship with D’s daughter. D believed V had treated his
daughter badly and sought revenge by posing as a young girl online and persuaded V to
masturbate in front of a webcam. D was planning to use this video to humiliate the boy.
Crown Court: guilty of sexual offence. Section 76 presumption applied V was deceived as
to D’s purpose in relation to the sexual act. Conviction upheld on appeal.
R v Elbekkay [1995]
the appellant had been out drinking with a couple and retired to the couples flat. The
boyfriend fell asleep on the sofa and the appellant climbed into bed with the complainant.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller rachelgrantlawandcriminology. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $6.47. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
56326 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now