Case Studies: Defences in Criminal Law 2

View mindmap
  • Case Studies: Defences in Criminal Law 2- Consent
    • Burrell v Harmer (1967)
      • D tattooed 2 boys aged 12 and 13. Boys consented.
      • Held: boys' consent was ineffective since the court was of the opinion they were unable to comprehend the nature of the act
      • D was liable for assault causing ABH under s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861
    • Gillick v West Norfolk & Wisback Area Health Authority
      • Sought a declaration that it would be unlawful for a Dr to prescribe contraceptives to girls under 16 without knowledge or consent of parent
      • Mrs Gillick= mother of 5 daughters under 16
      • Held: declaration refused
    • Fraud
      • Tabassum (2000)
        • Intentional deception as to the purpose of the act
        • Man with no qualifications examines 3 women under the pretense that he is conducting a study on breast cancer
    • R v Wilson (1996)
      • Appellant branded his initials on wife's buttocks with hot knife. She had asked him to. Skin became infected and she sought medical treatment from Dr
      • Dr reported matter to police and husband was charged with ABH under s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861
      • Held: wife's consent was valid. Branding was more akin to tattooing rather than infliction of pain for sexual gratification
    • R v Aitken (1992)
      • They had done 2 officers and extinguished with no injury. The third officer sustained serious burns.
      • Appellants were RAF officers. Celebrating finishing training, as a joke, they had set fire to officers wearing their fire resistant clothing
      • Appellants court martialled and convicted of GBH under s.20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861
      • Held: Appeal allowed. If officer consented or officers believe he consented it was open for the judge to find that no offence had been committed
    • R v Brown (1993)
      • Injuries were inflicted during consensual homosexual sadomasochist activities
      • 5 appellants convicted on various counts of ABH and wounding under Offences Against the Person Act 1861
      • Judge ruled consent of V conferred no defence and the appellants thus pleaded guilty ad appealed
      • Consent to being harmed for sexual pleasure will not be valid


No comments have yet been made

Similar Criminology resources:

See all Criminology resources »See all Criminal Justice resources »